Paul Krugman - NY Times: America Becomes a Stan

Guille said:
Oh God, where to start.

Those are not fights over economic ideology, they are fights over how much to tax the American people, they are arguing over an input not theory. Also, there is no such thing as economic ideology.

Doesn't matter who is in charge, Caesar gets his.
Click to expand...
I see. So there's no such thing as 'supply side' economics?
 
Guille said:
Of course there is and sometimes it works if the conditions are right. It worked for Reagan because the conditions in the country were right but it wouldn't work today.
Click to expand...
Actually, it didn't work for Reagan. Just as it didn't work for Bush. Reagan put it all on a credit card, and Pappa Bush paid dearly when the S&L crash came about.
 
Guille said:
Actually no, econ has no ideology. No matter how much you want a market to act a certain way you know in the end what it will actually do whether you want it to or not. And Krugman knows that but sometimes pretends he doesn't.
Click to expand...

Guille said:
Of course there is and sometimes it works if the conditions are right. It worked for Reagan because the conditions in the country were right but it wouldn't work today.
Click to expand...
OK...I must have misunderstood
 
Althea said:
Actually, it didn't work for Reagan. Just as it didn't work for Bush. Reagan put it all on a credit card, and Pappa Bush paid dearly when the S&L crash came about.
Click to expand...

Yes, it did work for Reagan. It worked for Reagan because the problem at that time was excessive taxation, business needed relief in order to modernize. It wouldn't work today because capital isn't the problem.

Credit card, really? I'm not a debt or a deficit hawk so peddle that somewhere else.

I wasn't a fan of Papa Bush either so peddle that somewhere else too.
 
Guille said:
Yes, it did work for Reagan. It worked for Reagan because the problem at that time was excessive taxation, business needed relief in order to modernize. It wouldn't work today because capital isn't the problem.

Credit card, really? I'm not a debt or a deficit hawk so peddle that somewhere else.

I wasn't a fan of Papa Bush either so peddle that somewhere else too.
Click to expand...
By your logic, it worked for Bush also. Bubble/Bust economies only appear to work, until the piper must be paid. I didn't suggest that you supported Bush, or anyone. They both used the same economic theory, and it failed both times. Ironically, a Democrat fixed the mess both times, and now we're poised to make the same mistake again.


Edit to add...

Reagan entered office with a 70% top marginal rate. He reduced it to 50% at first. If it worked, do you support a 50% top marginal rate, coupled with PUBLIC sector hiring, as Reagan did?

Bush too.
 
Last edited:
Deplorable Me said:
You must not be wearing a safety pin!
Click to expand...
ROFL..I swear the whining still.....Obama doubles the debt for job growth without decent GDP ( wealth growth).
Now get the GDP and we will be the top economy by organic reforms the Dems ignore/abhor.
MAGA baby.
 
Krugman won a Nobel Prize for his trade theory. Kudos to him. That doesn't make his partisan political opinions anymore valuable than others. What's surprising is how much support he's getting here considering the number of Bernie supporters there were on this board. Krugman just shredded Bernie economically when he went all in on Hillary.
 
Althea said:
By your logic, it worked for Bush also.
Click to expand...

Logic obviously isn't your strong suit. I already made it clear that Reagan succeeded because he did the right thing at the right time.

Althea said:
Bubble/Bust economies only appear to work, until the piper must be paid.
Click to expand...

They work quite well, all boom/bust is is the market correcting itself.
Althea said:
I didn't suggest that you supported Bush, or anyone. They both used the same economic theory, and it failed both times.
Click to expand...

You did suggest it, they definitely didn't hold the same opinions on economics but even if they had you still ignore the part where I said it worked for Reagan because it was what was needed at the time. Supply side and demand side are not mutually exclusive.

Althea said:
Ironically, a Democrat fixed the mess both times, and now we're poised to make the same mistake again.
Click to expand...

I don't even know what to say to this. Clinton was partially responsible for our financial meltdown and Obama has overseen consistent 2% growth. You apparently have very low standards.

Althea said:
Reagan entered office with a 70% top marginal rate. He reduced it to 50% at first. If it worked, do you support a 50% top marginal rate, coupled with PUBLIC sector hiring, as Reagan did?

Bush too.
Click to expand...

Now we find out if you know what you're talking about. Why did Reagan think it was imperative to lower the top rate?

By the way, I know people like you really like to put people in one of two boxes but I actually don't have a problem with public sector hiring if it's needed.
 
Guille said:
Krugman isn't an idiot, when he sticks to Econ I actually like to read his stuff but unfortunately he tries to mix econ with political and social issues a little too much and you really can't do that and sound intelligent.
Click to expand...

A friend of mine has a BS in Econ, and he agrees with me that what Krugman and other libs practice is "politically motivated economics", in that they try to advance an economic theory that fits their political motivation.

In this case it is Keynesian. But Keynes would be appalled at how far they have extrapolated his theory.
 
Right said:
A friend of mine has a BS in Econ, and he agrees with me that what Krugman and other libs practice is "politically motivated economics", in that they try to advance an economic theory that fits their political motivation.

In this case it is Keynesian. But Keynes would be appalled at how far they have extrapolated his theory.
Click to expand...

I agree they're politically motivated. I disagree that they're Keynesian, they are nothing like John Maynard Keynes.

Edit: strike my last sentence, I just saw yours and I agree.
 
Last edited:
Nomad said:
Slumpistan because winning is all you slump buckets care about.

To hell with what it does to the spirit of our democracy because none of that even matters to you trash anyway.
Click to expand...

its why the republican party has spent decades claiming we are not a democracy
 
Right said:
A friend of mine has a BS in Econ, and he agrees with me that what Krugman and other libs practice is "politically motivated economics", in that they try to advance an economic theory that fits their political motivation.

In this case it is Keynesian. But Keynes would be appalled at how far they have extrapolated his theory.
Click to expand...

we are all Keynesians now ring a bell asshole
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top