1. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    22048
    15 Aug '11 21:04
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    He's been saying it for years. He said it a couple of weeks ago AGAIN:


    So this is a really good time to borrow for infrastructure spending, which we badly need and which would create jobs at a time when we badly need jobs.”

    http://dailycaller.com/2011/08/01/krugman-we-are-repeating-the-mistakes-of-the-1930s-value-added-tax-plausible-solution/
    I read the article and he did call for infrastructure spending. I've been saying the same thing for years and government would never approve anything that was big enough to jolt the economy and infrastructure spending was far too little. Most of it was for other stuff and I determined the "powers that be" did not want a recovery and this economic mess was by design. Like Krugman said in the article, "We seem to be doing our best shot at recreating the Great Depression".

    It seems to me that "the powers that be" are doing just that. This is by design so they can create order out of chaos that will benefit them at our expense. After all, there must be a reason our government wants to spend smaller stimulus amounts over time rather than spending it all at once to actually have a chance at recovery. Almost all of the money should have been in infrastructure spending but it wasn't. It was like it was designed to fail.

    However, now some are saying that all that WW2 spending was not all that effective. The article I posted mentions that we had a brief recession after all that spending. Peter Schiff claims that the economy didn't recover until after spending was cut, contrary to the claims of Krugman and even myself since I believed and said the same thing. You seem to be in the same camp as well, right?
    So were we right or wrong? Does Schiff have a point or not?
  2. Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    34587
    16 Aug '11 03:17
    Originally posted by telerion
    Did I miss the spot where Paul Krugman says that the only way to increase production is with military spending?
    Metal Brain's 'performance' on this thread reminds me of those hundreds of breathless boggling malcontents at www.freerepublic.com a few months back spitting chips about Obama asserting the 'right to pray in accordance with one's faith' and then then saying Obama was thus pointedly not asserting the broader 'right to worship'... why didn't he assert right to worship why did he only assert the right to pray I told you I warned you I have been saying all along Obama is going to deny us the right to worship Obama is going to ban worship Obama is going to ban religion... etc. etc. LOL. 😵
  3. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    22048
    16 Aug '11 03:38
    Originally posted by FMF
    Metal Brain's 'performance' on this thread reminds me of those hundreds of breathless boggling malcontents at www.freerepublic.com a few months back spitting chips about Obama asserting the 'right to pray in accordance with one's faith' and then then saying Obama was thus pointedly not asserting the broader 'right to worship'... why didn't he assert right to ...[text shortened]... p Obama is going to ban worship Obama is going to ban religion... etc. etc. LOL. 😵
    Krugman is still stupid for bringing up space aliens to make his point. It was a needless distraction that made him sound crazy. Just think if Ron Paul digressed into something like that. He would never hear the end of it.
    BTW, I am an atheist. That was a poor comparison. A better comparison would be when you tried comparing me to a rapist for merely saying I didn't feel sorry for Lara Logan. LOL! That was a far worse performance by far. You know what they say about glass houses.
  4. Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    34587
    16 Aug '11 03:45
    Originally posted by Metal Brain
    I am an atheist. That was a poor comparison.
    The 'comparison', as you put it, merely sought to show how people in fulmination mode will resort to a huge degree of selectivity and literalism in order to make 'points' that turn out to be lame and risible as a result.
  5. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    22048
    16 Aug '11 03:58
    Originally posted by FMF
    The 'comparison', as you put it, merely sought to show how people in fulmination mode will resort to a huge degree of selectivity and literalism in order to make 'points' that turn out to be lame and risible as a result.
    You do that often.
    Take a look at yourself.
  6. Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    34587
    16 Aug '11 04:36
    Originally posted by Metal Brain
    You do that often.
    The issue at hand is that you have done it here to attack Paul Krugman [who can be criticized without resort to your kind of tittle-tattle approach] and, as a result, your lashing out has fallen on its face. You do that often.
  7. Joined
    07 Dec '05
    Moves
    22048
    16 Aug '11 05:03
    Originally posted by FMF
    The issue at hand is that you have done it here to attack Paul Krugman [who can be criticized without resort to your kind of tittle-tattle approach] and, as a result, your lashing out has fallen on its face. You do that often.
    If I did it often you would be there to rub it in. I guess I have embarrassed you in past debates and bruised your ego for such a prolonged resentment from you.

    I'll take it as a complement of my debating. Thanks!
  8. Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    34587
    16 Aug '11 05:17
    Originally posted by Metal Brain
    If I did it often you would be there to rub it in. I guess I have embarrassed you in past debates and bruised your ego for such a prolonged resentment from you.

    I'll take it as a complement of my debating. Thanks!
    The issue here is not one of ego. I am responding to your OP.

    On this thread you resorted to extraordinary selectivity and literalism in order to make an attack point against Paul Krugman and it has turned out to be a rather lame and risible effort. Are you able to offer a critique of Paul Krugman without your 'aliens' thing?
  9. Subscribershavixmir
    Guppy poo
    Sewers of Holland
    Joined
    31 Jan '04
    Moves
    87542
    16 Aug '11 05:25
    Originally posted by Metal Brain
    Why can't Krugman just call for massive infrastructure spending and leave aliens out of it? Is he really as crazy as he sounds?

    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/08/14/paul-krugman-calls-space-aliens-attack-earth-requiring-massive-defens
    Sweet Jesus.
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree