For Darla... three articles on Krugman from Huffpost...

[Dantès]

Oh, I just bet you did.

There's a lot of people looking at land these days,.

 

[Bonestorm]

Krugman was telling all that would listen that the austerity measures brought in by David Cameron's coalition would cause untold damage even though there weren't really any cuts to overall spending at all, just a cut in the rate of rise in spending.

http://danieljmitchell.wordpress.co...at-krugman-was-wrong-about-u-k-fiscal-policy/

LOL. Actually, the UK government cut spending in 2011. And the economy stagnated. In fact, UK GDP is still well below its earlier peak notwithstanding Cameron's rosy predictions of growth when the cuts were implemented.

 

[Bonestorm]

Flatlining investment by Britain's battered businesses was the main reason the independent Office for Budget Responsibility drastically overestimated the likely strength of the economic recovery, it conceded in its latest forecast review.

The OBR, set up by George Osborne to provide a check on Treasury number-crunching, said in its annual forecasting evaluation report that when it set out the expected path for the recovery in June 2010, shortly after the coalition came to power, it was projecting that business investment would bounce back strongly, as in previous recoveries.

Instead of the 8.9% rise in real GDP since mid-2010 the OBR had forecast, growth had been just 3.2% by the second quarter of this year; and instead of expanding by 4.2% in real terms, private investment has declined by 0.4%. What recovery there has been since 2010 has been dominated by a jump in private consumption.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/oct/09/obr-uk-economic-recovery-forecasts-investment

 

[cancel2 2022]

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/oct/09/obr-uk-economic-recovery-forecasts-investment

Here is what the great Krugman said in 2010 about the Coalition policies in 2010.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-1931-says-Nobel-Prize-winning-economist.html

Oh and if you weren't such a myopic fool you might have seen that the OBR stated that the cutbacks were not responsible for the longest downturn in 100 years.

Austerity is not to blame for the longest downturn in more than 100 years, the independent budget watchdog said yesterday.
The Office for Budget Responsibility blamed weaker than expected growth over the past three years on high inflation, a slump in business investment and sluggish demand for exports. It said tax rises and spending cuts ‘could have had a bigger impact on growth than we anticipated’ at the time of George Osborne’s emergency Budget in June 2010. But it added: ‘This still does not look the most obvious explanation … There are a number of more plausible explanations for this weakness.’

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...erdict-fresh-boost-Osborne.html#ixzz2hQtGvO1f

 

[Bonestorm]

Here is what the great Krugman said in 2010 about the Coalition policies in 2010.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-1931-says-Nobel-Prize-winning-economist.html

Krugman was right.

Oh and if you weren't such a myopic fool you might have seen that the OBR stated that the cutbacks were not responsible for the longest downturn in 100 years.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...erdict-fresh-boost-Osborne.html#ixzz2hQtGvO1f

Oh, right. So I guess Krugman was right about the UK economy slumping in response to Cameron's austerity policies but we're supposed to pretend he was right for the wrong reasons. Or something. LOL.

Also, too:

 

[Bonestorm]

Also, too, the Daily Mail did not accurately report what the Office for Budget Responsibility actually said about the causes of the prolonged economic malaise.

 

[cancel2 2022]

Also, too, the Daily Mail did not accurately report what the Office for Budget Responsibility actually said about the causes of the prolonged economic malaise.

Right so you quote the Guardian which has a visceral hatred for the Coalition instead. Krugman said that the UK would be returned to the 1930s, funny how you missed that.

Cuts 'will take UK back to 1931' says Nobel Prize winning economist


UPDATED: 17:29, 23 October 2010

A Nobel prize-winning economist has warned Britain will plunge into a 1930s-style crisis because of the big spending cuts planned by George Osborne.
Paul Krugman said the Government ‘seems determined to ignore the lessons of history’ and should wait until ‘a solid recovery is under way before wielding the axe’. His comments come days after the Chancellor outlined £81 billion of cuts to bring the budget deficit back under control.

‘The British Government’s plan is bold, say the pundits — and so it is. But it boldly goes in exactly the wrong direction,’ said Mr Krugman, a professor of economics at Princeton University, in the U.S. ‘It would cut government employment by 490,000 workers at a time when the private sector is in no position to provide alternative employment,’ he said. ‘It would slash spending at a time when private demand isn’t at all ready to take up the slack.’
Mr Krugman predicted that Britain in 2011 ‘will look like Britain in 1931’ following Philip Snowden’s notorious emergency budget in which the then Chancellor cut unemployment benefits at the height of the Great Depression. ‘Premature fiscal austerity will lead to a renewed economic slump,’ he warned.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...el-Prize-winning-economist.html#ixzz2hR4ilwBr

 

[Bonestorm]

Right so you quote the Guardian which has a visceral hatred for the Coalition instead. Krugman said that the UK would be returned to the 1930s, funny how you missed that.

Cuts 'will take UK back to 1931' says Nobel Prize winning economist


UPDATED: 17:29, 23 October 2010

A Nobel prize-winning economist has warned Britain will plunge into a 1930s-style crisis because of the big spending cuts planned by George Osborne.
Paul Krugman said the Government ‘seems determined to ignore the lessons of history’ and should wait until ‘a solid recovery is under way before wielding the axe’. His comments come days after the Chancellor outlined £81 billion of cuts to bring the budget deficit back under control.

‘The British Government’s plan is bold, say the pundits — and so it is. But it boldly goes in exactly the wrong direction,’ said Mr Krugman, a professor of economics at Princeton University, in the U.S. ‘It would cut government employment by 490,000 workers at a time when the private sector is in no position to provide alternative employment,’ he said. ‘It would slash spending at a time when private demand isn’t at all ready to take up the slack.’
Mr Krugman predicted that Britain in 2011 ‘will look like Britain in 1931’ following Philip Snowden’s notorious emergency budget in which the then Chancellor cut unemployment benefits at the height of the Great Depression. ‘Premature fiscal austerity will lead to a renewed economic slump,’ he warned.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...el-Prize-winning-economist.html#ixzz2hR4ilwBr

Here's what the Office for Budget Responsibility actually said about Cameron's austerity policies and the prolonged stagnation of your economy:

We remain of the view that the fiscal consolidation could have had a bigger impact on growth than we anticipated in June 2010, but that this still does not look the most obvious explanation. If the fiscal consolidation did have a bigger impact than expected, it is not obvious why this should be felt so much more in the corporate sector than by households.

The Daily Mail lied to you.


Below is a link to Krugman's column that is quoted in the piece. Krugman was correct. Premature fiscal austerity led to a renewed economic slump. Here's a chart of US GDP growth as compared to the UK. Gee what happened to the UK in 2011? Things were seemingly OK until something happened. I wonder what it was.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/22/opinion/22krugman.html?pagewanted=print



Edit: It's funny how you missed the chart I posted showing how the UK economy is in a longer slump than in the 1930s. So what, exactly, was Krugman wrong about in making that comparison?

 

[cancel2 2022]

Here's what the Office for Budget Responsibility actually said about Cameron's austerity policies and the prolonged stagnation of your economy:



The Daily Mail lied to you.


Below is a link to Krugman's column that is quoted in the piece. Krugman was correct. Premature fiscal austerity led to a renewed economic slump. Here's a chart of US GDP growth as compared to the UK. Gee what happened to the UK in 2011? Things were seemingly OK until something happened. I wonder what it was.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/22/opinion/22krugman.html?pagewanted=print



Edit: It's funny how you missed the chart I posted showing how the UK economy is in a longer slump than in the 1930s. So what, exactly, was Krugman wrong about in making that comparison?

Krugman said the cuts would return the UK to the 1930s, that never happened which is why you keep ignoring it.

This is what the UK treasury said.

The Treasury welcomed the OBR report and repeated its claim that ‘the UK economy has started to turn a corner’. A spokesman said: ‘There is no convincing evidence that the impact of the Government’s deficit reduction plan has been larger than the OBR originally expected in 2010. ‘Instead they find that a more likely explanation for slower than forecast growth is the impact of higher global commodity prices, the euro crisis and the ongoing impact of the financial crisis.‘The Government will not let up on its plan that has already cut the deficit by a third and created over one and a quarter million jobs.’

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...erdict-fresh-boost-Osborne.html#ixzz2hR974HZD

 

[Bonestorm]

Krugman said the cuts would return the UK to the 1930s, that never happened which is why you keep ignoring it.

No, I'm not ignoring it at all. I'm saying that's what happened. Here's Krugman's quote:

What happens now? Maybe Britain will get lucky, and something will come along to rescue the economy. But the best guess is that Britain in 2011 will look like Britain in 1931, or the United States in 1937, or Japan in 1997. That is, premature fiscal austerity will lead to a renewed economic slump. As always, those who refuse to learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.

And GDP growth in Britain 2011 was barely positive. How about we compare Krugman's prediction to those of Cameron and see which was closer to the mark?

This is what the UK treasury said.

We were talking about what the OBR said and the Daily Mail lying about what the OBR said. I quoted the OBR report directly. Of course Cameron's Treasury will spin it favorably. So, piss off.

 

[Bonestorm]

Let's post this again since Aox is a little confused about his own economy and the complete lack of recovery:

 

[cancel2 2022]

Let's post this again since Aox is a little confused about his own economy and the complete lack of recovery:

Yeh, that's right let's totally ignore that Krugman said the cuts would return Britain to the 1930s. Don't bother posting the same shit over and over again in an attempt to vindicate your God.

 

[Bonestorm]

Yeh, that's right let's totally ignore that Krugman said the cuts would return Britain to the 1930s.

Again, not ignoring it. How was he wrong? Allow me to post this chart a third time since you seem incapable of grasping its import:

In the 1930s, the UK economy contracted sharply but then rebounded to its earlier peak in about 48 months. We're at 60+ months and counting for this recession and the UK economy is still well below its earlier peak. And, by the way, the US economy rebounded to its earlier peak in early 2011, just about the time the UK economy regressed.

And remind me again what Cameron's government was predicting.

 

[Bonestorm]

And let's continue to ignore that the Daily Mail lied to you and you liked it.

 

[cancel2 2022]

And let's continue to ignore that the Daily Mail lied to you and you liked it.

I am off to the pub now, I'll leave it to SF to deliver the coup de grace.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

I am off to the pub now, I'll leave it to SF to deliver the coup de grace.

Lmao. Looks like even sf can't save your dumb ass.

 

[cancel2 2022]

And let's continue to ignore that the Daily Mail lied to you and you liked it.

You are just being an intransigent prick now, are you going to accuse the Telegraph of the same thing? Krugman said that the cuts would cause Britain to go back to the 1930s, no doubt meaning 20% unemployment and soup kitchens on every street corner. None of that happened but you are still trying to peddle the same old claptrap.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...ore-by-lack-of-investment-than-austerity.html

 

[Bonestorm]

You are just being an intransigent prick now, are you going to accuse the Telegraph of the same thing? Krugman said that the cuts would cause Britain to go back to the 1930s, no doubt meaning 20% unemployment and soup kitchens on every street corner. None of that happened but you are still trying to peddle the same old claptrap.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...ore-by-lack-of-investment-than-austerity.html

Ha! Dude I posted a link to his column. His point was plain: premature austerity would lead to a reversal of the recovery. And he was right.

And the Daily Mail lied to you and you liked it.

Also, too, what was Cameron's prediction about the effects of his austerity policies? You still haven't summoned the courage to post that information. I was hoping the pub would give you the liquid variety, but here we are.

 

[cancel2 2022]

Ha! Dude I posted a link to his column. His point was plain: premature austerity would lead to a reversal of the recovery. And he was right.

And the Daily Mail lied to you and you liked it.

Also, too, what was Cameron's prediction about the effects of his austerity policies? You still haven't summoned the courage to post that information. I was hoping the pub would give you the liquid variety, but here we are.

Truly pathetic, you told me it was Daily Mail spin yet the Telegraph says the exact same goddamn thing, you are so desperate to be right that it is really sad. Your whole burlesque routine is getting very old, time to hang up the feather boas and nipple tassles.

 

[tekkychick]

And here in the US - analysis says if Repubs hadn't forced austerity on us, unemployment would be below 6%

http://www.examiner.com/article/report-unemployment-would-be-below-6-percent-if-the-gop-didn-t-force-austerity

Looking back at the last three years since the Republicans took control of the House of Representatives, Hersh crunched the numbers and came to a shocking conclusion. If Republicans hadn't forced austerity economics on the American people, unemployment for the month of September would be south of 6 percent with a net gain of around 250,000 new jobs being created. Starting with December of 2010, the month after a Republican landslide in the midterm elections, there would have been 2.4 million additional jobs added to the economy, bringing the total to 8.2 million.