Originally posted by spruce112358 Krugman's lack of objective discussion of the matter has left him open to the accusation of having become nothing more than a Democratic partisan shill.
I understand the temptation of using one's cachet as a Noble Prize winner to try to advance a political agenda. It must be intoxicating to have that many people suddenly listening to your opinions. But I don't support or admire doing so.
Neither do you answer questions put to you, apparently.
Originally posted by normbenign "Keynesian economics also calls for spending cuts in good times; so it's not just a matter of borrowing and spending."
There are reasons why this doesn't work in practice. I like some of Milton Friedman's thoughts, but he strays too often and too far from the master, Ludvig Von Mises.
People like Friedman and Krugman are a sad reminder that unfortunately economics still has some way to go to becoming a real science.
Originally posted by KazetNagorra People like Friedman and Krugman are a sad reminder that unfortunately economics still has some way to go to becoming a real science.
People like Hayek and Mises demonstrate it is indeed a real science. It is fairly easy to test chemical and physical truths by lab experiments. Economic experiments often take decades or centuries, and involve factors impossible to track with accuracy.
Thus it is that proven fallacies come back like bad Tacos, over and over again.
Originally posted by spruce112358 The last Nobel Prize winner to be notably and publicly wrong was Linus Pauling who famously declared that Vitamin C cured the common cold. Now we have another one, Paul Krugman who declares, seemingly on a daily basis, that the cure to a debt meltdown is -- more debt.
Paul has worked out a theory under which debt is what makes a country rich while sa ...[text shortened]... uestion: if debt produces prosperity, why aren't we all prospering like crazy at the present?
I still go with the Nobel Prize winner. He makes a lot of sense. For an interesting and very informative read, check out his book:
Originally posted by spruce112358 The last Nobel Prize winner to be notably and publicly wrong was Linus Pauling who famously declared that Vitamin C cured the common cold. Now we have another one, Paul Krugman who declares, seemingly on a daily basis, that the cure to a debt meltdown is -- more debt.
Paul has worked out a theory under which debt is what makes a country rich while sa ...[text shortened]... uestion: if debt produces prosperity, why aren't we all prospering like crazy at the present?
here are 4 more nobel prize winners that were almost insane in their ignorance of other area of expertise. ignorance alone is not so bad, exceptional people must specialize in their fields to achieve something noteworthy. what set these apart is how insistent they were in using the influence a nobel prize got them to promote some insane pseudo-science.
27 Feb '13 16:28
Shut up, Paul
Back to Top