Krugman: Third Depression Watch

Try reading your own link you ignorant little hack. It says GDP has trended downward. AGAIN you are fucking cherry picking data. AGAIN.... look at the sum total moron.... month after month the LEI's OVERALL were UP. You fucking half wit.

I love how you now mock my economics background when it proves YOU wrong. But when you THOUGHT I was agreeing with you I 'knew a lot'.

and AGAIN... your analogy is flawed.... you pretended that the TREND had changed. It had not. You tried to use your mountain climbing analogy to say that because the last report was negative that must mean the trend was down. THAT is where you completely and utterly FAILED in your analogy. I tried to point it out to you and you respond by compounding your ignorance with stupidity.

As I stated, your little ambulance chasing background has not prepared you in the least to discuss economics. You clearly have no comprehension of the topic. I know you will now continue to desperately spin your way out of this, but everyone on this board can read the links to the LEI monthly reports that I provided for you. Only a brain dead moron wouldn't be able to comprehend the FACT that you are 100% wrong.

tff....first i cherry picked ONE indicator...of course now it has grown to merely cherry picking some indicators....LOL

thanks for admitting that some indicators, housing being LARGE, are down. at least you backed off your claim that my article stated the housing trend was up for the past 3 months.

you really think you're so smart, but you're not that smart, you just have a mediocre ability to twist what is actually said in order to make yourself look right. oh...and the anal analogy thing is a classic....
 
You can't do anything but parrot ignorant right wing talking points you hear on Faux propaganda channel. Bring me proof of your bullshit. Because I don't believe YOU. I want documentation.
Bring me your proof that these are "Faux propaganda channel" talking points.
 
tff....first i cherry picked ONE indicator...of course now it has grown to merely cherry picking some indicators....LOL

thanks for admitting that some indicators, housing being LARGE, are down. at least you backed off your claim that my article stated the housing trend was up for the past 3 months.

you really think you're so smart, but you're not that smart, you just have a mediocre ability to twist what is actually said in order to make yourself look right. oh...and the anal analogy thing is a classic....

You've gotta admit - it is pretty hilarious that you brought SF up over & over again in this and the other thread, as the resident economic expert, and then changed your mind once he showed how wrong you were...
 
You've gotta admit - it is pretty hilarious that you brought SF up over & over again in this and the other thread, as the resident economic expert, and then changed your mind once he showed how wrong you were...

no, the only thing i said liar....was that he knows more than YOU

i never said he was the expert....once again, in order to try and "win" onceler has to lie
 
no, the only thing i said liar....was that he knows more than YOU

i never said he was the expert....once again, in order to try and "win" onceler has to lie

LOL - that's funny.

You kept bringing him up; not me. Now, because he embarassed you, you're trying to back off of that...
 
LOL - that's funny.

You kept bringing him up; not me. Now, because he embarassed you, you're trying to back off of that...

i never brought him as an expert. that is your lie. i brought him up, other posters up, and myself -- solely to tell you that they have provided links, whereas, you have not. but of course, onceler has to lie about that and proclaim i brought SF up because i said he was the expert.

i know you won't link to any post where i said that because you lied. par for the course for you. when all else fails....make shit up and derail the thread with your lies.
 
i never brought him as an expert. that is your lie. i brought him up, other posters up, and myself -- solely to tell you that they have provided links, whereas, you have not. but of course, onceler has to lie about that and proclaim i brought SF up because i said he was the expert.

i know you won't link to any post where i said that because you lied. par for the course for you. when all else fails....make shit up and derail the thread with your lies.

I'm not lying. For the record, you're the one who jumped in at the beginning to make fun of me for my claim that most indicators have been trending up, which you then said had been proven "wrong," and then admitted later that in fact, most indicators have been trending up.

Seriously - why get into a debate on economics, with such apparently strong opinions, when you aren't even sure about that basic fact? It's embarassing...
 
tff....first i cherry picked ONE indicator...of course now it has grown to merely cherry picking some indicators....LOL

Yes, you are indeed cherry picking data. As for my comment regarding you cherry picking ONE. That was a direct reply to your post regarding HOUSING. Which is indeed ONE indicator. Then you pointed back to a previous post where you had cherry picked a few. I had not noticed that at the time I stated one. To which I then gave you a big old pat on the back for your 'gotcha moment'.

Thanks for admitting it and admitting that you were 100% wrong and Oncelor was correct in stating that leading indicators have indeed been trending up. As the links provided have shown to be true. Even YOUR link shows it to be true. Yet you are too ignorant with regards to economics to admit you didn't understand what you were reading. Hence your desire to change time frames and cherry pick data.

thanks for admitting that some indicators, housing being LARGE, are down. at least you backed off your claim that my article stated the housing trend was up for the past 3 months.

LMAO... you are truly spinning your wheels Yurt.... I stated all along that SOME indicators were down. I stated all along that the most recent months data was negative. Now... do show me which post I stated housing was up for the past three months....

No matter how many times you say 'housing is LARGE' it STILL DOESN'T CHANGE THE FACT THAT THE OVERALL TREND HAS BEEN UP.

So again....

Now.... take a look at the articles here..... http://www.ttnews.com/articles/baset...?storyid=26141

Note the headlines of them....

© 2010, Transport Topics Publishing Group. All rights reserved. RELATED ARTICLES
Leading Indicators Fall in April (5/19/2011 10:00:00 AM)
Leading Economic Indicators Grow 0.4% (4/21/2011 10:00:00 AM)
Leading Economic Indicators Improve 0.8% (3/18/2011 8:10:00 AM)
Leading Economic Indicators Rise for Seventh Month (2/17/2011 10:10:00 AM)
Leading Economic Indicators Jump in December (1/20/2011 10:15:00 AM)

But no..... YURT thinks because 'housing is large' the trend must be down. Then Yurt pretends he knows more on the subject than myself.... who has quite convincingly (by the above alone) shown Yurt to be insanely foolish on the topic.


you really think you're so smart, but you're not that smart, you just have a mediocre ability to twist what is actually said in order to make yourself look right. oh...and the anal analogy thing is a classic....[/QUOTE]
 
I'm not lying. For the record, you're the one who jumped in at the beginning to make fun of me for my claim that most indicators have been trending up, which you then said had been proven "wrong," and then admitted later that in fact, most indicators have been trending up.

Seriously - why get into a debate on economics, with such apparently strong opinions, when you aren't even sure about that basic fact? It's embarassing...

then post where i said SF was the expert here. you said i did so repeately, so finding one post should be easy.

because i am aware of the facts and BACKED my opinion up, unlike you who never once backed your opinion with any facts. poor SF had to come to your rescue because you're incapable of rational debate. all you do is prance around your opinion. you need others to actually give facts, cites and coherent argument.

let's see the link onceler.....$50 bucks, via damo, you don't provide it. wanna bet and this time, we can secure the terms with damo. the terms are expressly this:

i never -->
brought SF up over & over again in this and the other thread, as the resident economic expert

if you're not lying, an easy $50 bucks for your three day weekend...wanna take the bet?
 
then post where i said SF was the expert here. you said i did so repeately, so finding one post should be easy.

because i am aware of the facts and BACKED my opinion up, unlike you who never once backed your opinion with any facts. poor SF had to come to your rescue because you're incapable of rational debate. all you do is prance around your opinion. you need others to actually give facts, cites and coherent argument.

let's see the link onceler.....$50 bucks, via damo, you don't provide it. wanna bet and this time, we can secure the terms with damo. the terms are expressly this:

i never -->

if you're not lying, an easy $50 bucks for your three day weekend...wanna take the bet?

I don't bet on the web, and it's also idiotic for you to deny that you brought him up repeatedly. Seriously? You're denying that now? I honestly don't feel any need whatsoever to go back through both threads & put together the muliple times you invoked SF for economic superiority.

As for your previous demands for links, it's not my job here to educate you. If you're in a discussion about economics, indicators are pretty fundamental. It's like someone saying that the market is up today, and you demanding "link up!" Sorry, but that knowledge is readily available to anyone who regularly follows the economy, and should be a pre-requisite to discuss the economy on the board.

Your opinion was the the economic indicators have NOT been trending up, which you didn't back up, because it's wrong; as you later admitted.
 
UOTE=Onceler;819136]I don't bet on the web, and it's also idiotic for you to deny that you brought him up repeatedly. Seriously? You're denying that now? I honestly don't feel any need whatsoever to go back through both threads & put together the muliple times you invoked SF for economic superiority.

do you ever tire of your lies? i never denied bringing him up more than once -- i denied i brought him up as an expert. yes, i am categorically denying your lie that over and over said he was the resident expert. since you're too much a wuss to take the bet.....if you show the repeated posts i will leave the board forever.

the only thing i said about SF's knowledge, was that he knows more than YOU. show the posts and i will leave jpp forever.

As for your previous demands for links, it's not my job here to educate you. If you're in a discussion about economics, indicators are pretty fundamental. It's like someone saying that the market is up today, and you demanding "link up!" Sorry, but that knowledge is readily available to anyone who regularly follows the economy, and should be a pre-requisite to discuss the economy on the board.

Your opinion was the the economic indicators have NOT been trending up, which you didn't back up, because it's wrong; as you later admitted.

right...you get to DEMAND links from other posters, but never provide any yourself. the only time i've ever seen you give a link, even to a post on this board, is when you think you're right or have a gotcha moment. if you want to be taken seriously, then back your statements up. simply running around proclaiming you're right because you say so is dumb. at least SF backed his arguments up. you arrogantly think we all should just treat your opinions as fact. it goes back to your incessent need to feel smarter than everyone.

i did in fact back my opinion up. good lord, why do you lie about this stuff. housing = down; gdp = down.....

have you ever admitted you're wrong on this board? 4th time now for this question. are you going to man up and answer it or slink away as usual.

PREDICTION: onceler will not cite one post where i called SF the resident expert, let alone multiples posts
 
do you ever tire of your lies? i never denied bringing him up more than once -- i denied i brought him up as an expert. yes, i am categorically denying your lie that over and over said he was the resident expert. since you're too much a wuss to take the bet.....if you show the repeated posts i will leave the board forever.

the only thing i said about SF's knowledge, was that he knows more than YOU. show the posts and i will leave jpp forever.



right...you get to DEMAND links from other posters, but never provide any yourself. the only time i've ever seen you give a link, even to a post on this board, is when you think you're right or have a gotcha moment. if you want to be taken seriously, then back your statements up. simply running around proclaiming you're right because you say so is dumb. at least SF backed his arguments up. you arrogantly think we all should just treat your opinions as fact. it goes back to your incessent need to feel smarter than everyone.

i did in fact back my opinion up. good lord, why do you lie about this stuff. housing = down; gdp = down.....

have you ever admitted you're wrong on this board? 4th time now for this question. are you going to man up and answer it or slink away as usual.

PREDICTION: onceler will not cite one post where i called SF the resident expert, let alone multiples posts

PREDICTION: Despite being provided LINKS, YURT will not admit Oncelor was correct in stating that Leading Indicators are trending UP.
 
does my link say housing is an up or down indicator for the past three months? you're twisting as usual.

thank for the other links, it appears that most do say the overall indicators are up. thanks SF. even if you are superanal about analogies, you're not a half bad guy for an armchair weekend warrior :D

PREDICTION: Despite being provided LINKS, YURT will not admit Oncelor was correct in stating that Leading Indicators are trending UP.

as i said....they appear to be...what more do you want weekend arm chair warrior? i thank you for the links and you're still bitching.
 
Bring me your proof that these are "Faux propaganda channel" talking points.

Tells me 2 things...

1) you didn't read the link I provided. But I am not surprised, the right wing dogmatic mind is allergic to any knowledge that isn't 'fed' to them by their propagandist handlers.

2) If you had another source you would have provided it. So we are let with my facts and your emoting.

FDR Prolonged the Depression? Really?

If you're like me, you sometimes find yourself speechless when confronted with abject insanity.

If you're like me, for instance, you were dumbfounded when "Forrest Gump" beat out "Pulp Fiction" for best picture; when HBO's "Sopranos" received more accolades than "The Wire"; and when George W. Bush insisted Iraqi airplanes were about to drop WMDs on American cities.

So if you're like me, you probably understand why I was momentarily tongue-tied last week after running face-first into conservatives' newest (and most ridiculous) talking point — the one designed to stop Congress from passing an economic stimulus package.

During a Christmas Eve appearance on Fox News, I pointed out that most mainstream economists believe the government must boost the economy with deficit spending. That's when conservative pundit Monica Crowley said we should instead limit such spending because President Franklin Roosevelt's "massive government intervention actually prolonged the Great Depression." Fox News anchor Gregg Jarrett eagerly concurred, saying "historians pretty much agree on that."

Of course, I had recently heard snippets of this silly argument — right-wing pundits are repeating it everywhere these days. But I had never heard it articulated in such preposterous terms, so my initial reaction was paralysis — the mouth-agape, deer-in-the-headlights kind. Only after collecting myself did I say that such assertions about the New Deal were absurd. But then I was laughed at — as if it was hilarious to say that the New Deal did anything but exacerbate the Depression.

Afterwards, suffering pangs of self-doubt, I wondered whether I and most of the country are the crazy ones. Sure, the vast majority of Americans think the New Deal worked well. But are conservatives right? Did the New Deal's "massive government intervention prolong the Great Depression?"

Ummm ... no.

Upon deeper examination, I discovered that the right bases its New Deal revisionism on the short-lived recession in a year straddling 1937 and 1938.

...
 
as i said....they appear to be...what more do you want weekend arm chair warrior? i thank you for the links and you're still bitching.

Thanking me for the links and saying 'they appear to be' is not the same yurt.

They don't 'appear to be'.... THEY ARE.

You saying 'they appear to be' is your way of trying to weasel out of having to admit Oncelor was right and you were wrong.

As for your idiocy of 'weekend arm chair warrior'.... do make a Yurt like attempt to explain what you mean by this. Are you referring to economics? Or outdoor activity? My guess is, I have done more in both respects in the past 12 months than you have done in your past ten years.
 
Tells me 2 things...

1) you didn't read the link I provided. But I am not surprised, the right wing dogmatic mind is allergic to any knowledge that isn't 'fed' to them by their propagandist handlers.

2) If you had another source you would have provided it. So we are let with my facts and your emoting.

FDR Prolonged the Depression? Really?

If you're like me, you sometimes find yourself speechless when confronted with abject insanity.

If you're like me, for instance, you were dumbfounded when "Forrest Gump" beat out "Pulp Fiction" for best picture; when HBO's "Sopranos" received more accolades than "The Wire"; and when George W. Bush insisted Iraqi airplanes were about to drop WMDs on American cities.

So if you're like me, you probably understand why I was momentarily tongue-tied last week after running face-first into conservatives' newest (and most ridiculous) talking point — the one designed to stop Congress from passing an economic stimulus package.

During a Christmas Eve appearance on Fox News, I pointed out that most mainstream economists believe the government must boost the economy with deficit spending. That's when conservative pundit Monica Crowley said we should instead limit such spending because President Franklin Roosevelt's "massive government intervention actually prolonged the Great Depression." Fox News anchor Gregg Jarrett eagerly concurred, saying "historians pretty much agree on that."

Of course, I had recently heard snippets of this silly argument — right-wing pundits are repeating it everywhere these days. But I had never heard it articulated in such preposterous terms, so my initial reaction was paralysis — the mouth-agape, deer-in-the-headlights kind. Only after collecting myself did I say that such assertions about the New Deal were absurd. But then I was laughed at — as if it was hilarious to say that the New Deal did anything but exacerbate the Depression.

Afterwards, suffering pangs of self-doubt, I wondered whether I and most of the country are the crazy ones. Sure, the vast majority of Americans think the New Deal worked well. But are conservatives right? Did the New Deal's "massive government intervention prolong the Great Depression?"

Ummm ... no.

Upon deeper examination, I discovered that the right bases its New Deal revisionism on the short-lived recession in a year straddling 1937 and 1938.

...

I didn't read your links because I've seen all the left-wing opinions on it before. I'll ax you again: Bring me your proof that these are "Faux propaganda channel" talking points.
 
Thanking me for the links and saying 'they appear to be' is not the same yurt.

They don't 'appear to be'.... THEY ARE.

You saying 'they appear to be' is your way of trying to weasel out of having to admit Oncelor was right and you were wrong.

As for your idiocy of 'weekend arm chair warrior'.... do make a Yurt like attempt to explain what you mean by this. Are you referring to economics? Or outdoor activity? My guess is, I have done more in both respects in the past 12 months than you have done in your past ten years.

i never figured you to be so anal and such a whiner....good lord

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...-left-with-nothing-to-say&p=819155#post819155

^ address the last two posts, i would have brought them here, but it would have been to confusing and it goes the heart of your idiocy in proclaiming how right onceler is now...when at first, you said he was wrong. hilarious really....you and are saying basically the same thing, but for some reason you have your underwear twisted so tight around your head you can't even understand a simple analogy and have to analyze it like it is a graduate thesis....oh wait, you only have an undergrad....then like a undergrad term paper.
 
i never figured you to be so anal and such a whiner....good lord

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...-left-with-nothing-to-say&p=819155#post819155

^ address the last two posts, i would have brought them here, but it would have been to confusing and it goes the heart of your idiocy in proclaiming how right onceler is now...when at first, you said he was wrong. hilarious really....you and are saying basically the same thing, but for some reason you have your underwear twisted so tight around your head you can't even understand a simple analogy and have to analyze it like it is a graduate thesis....oh wait, you only have an undergrad....then like a undergrad term paper.

Don't worry Yurt.... I ALWAYS figured you to be a whiner and a putz.

Already addressed it on the other thread.
 
Back
Top