http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/14/business/economy/14samuelson.html?_r=1&hp
Read my Nolan Chart column "Me & My Big Mouth"
Caley,
Actually, you didn't. My argument in no way implies we shouldn't judge Hitler for his actions. But there is a clear difference between Samuelson and Hitler (I can't believe I have to explain this).
Hitler led the Nazi movement. His subordinates killed others on his orders. Therefore, Hitler shares guilt with them for their deaths.
Paul Samuelson never occupied a position of political decision making power. At most, political leaders sought his advice on economic issues and he provided it based on his best understanding of the economics (and I would stress that Samuelson was more than upfront about the limitations of his understandings and more than willing to give his critics their due). But any decisions they made in the end were theirs alone. They were under no obligation to take Samuelson's advice. Indeed, if they wanted, they could have consulted other economists for contrasting opinions.
If you cannot see a difference between Samuelson advocating Keynesian economics and Hitler ordering people to be killed, then you are truly allowing your political leanings to cloud your judgement.
Ambition is a dream with a V8 engine - Elvis Presley
Oh cmon that is rediculous. He never put a gun to anyone's head saying adopt these policies. I believe that he believed in what he argued, so I cannot blame him for trying. However, people like FDR all the way through Obama, I do criticize.
Its always unfortunate when someone dies. I may not feel any real sadness for him, but I certainly think the "good riddance" replies here are pretty immature.
My personal Anarcho-Capitalist flag. The symbol in the center stands for "harmony" and "protection"-- I'm hoping to illustrate the bond between order/justice and anarchy.
so he's less like Hitler and more like Gottfried Feder?
ok, sure.
Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid
Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring
Student:Paul Samuelson never occupied a position of political decision making power.
um, they are both economists sure. But beyond that I don't see the comparison.
I'm simply at a loss. Even if you dislike Keynesian economics, in fact, even if you think that Keynesian economics has been counterproductive in science and perhaps damaging in the real world of policy, how much have the damages been???? Can you measure them?
If not, can you at least describe the type of consequences of Keynesian economics that you believe cause "widespread misery" (as someone said)??? Is it Higher taxes? Slower economic growth and fewer jobs? And is comparable to anything Hitler has done or supported. Just think about this people. Do you ***really*** want to compare supporting government management of the business cycle through fiscal policy to supporting the genocide of the Jews!?!? HONESTLY!?!?
I can't believe I am having this conversation. Anyone making these arguments is clearly mad.
PS* Godwin's Law :P
Stranger: He deserves to have his death forgotten, as it soon will be.
He deserves to have his death forgotten, as it soon will be.
I consider that fair.
Student, you are being hyperbolic on the issue..... no one has said "Samuelson is just as evil and i hate him no more or less than I hate Hitler."
maybe someone would say that...., but they haven't yet. so maybe you should actually provoke the particular response you want to rage against so that it is unmissably there.... before you rage against it.
Student: Do you ***really*** want to compare supporting government management of the business cycle through fiscal policy to supporting the genocide of the Jews!?!? HONESTLY!?!?
Do you ***really*** want to compare supporting government management of the business cycle through fiscal policy to supporting the genocide of the Jews!?!? HONESTLY!?!?
they both, for a fact, were/are centrally planned. it's methodically detailed.
nirgrahamUK ,
You yourself compared Paul Samuelson to anti-semetic, Nazi Economist Gottfried Feder!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gottfried_Feder
Aside from the fact that both of these men are economists, I see absolutely NO comparison at all between them!! I think its pretty clear you are just trying to compare Paul Samuelson to a Nazi. Why, I don't know.
But I think I am coming to the conclusion that you are either trolling or absolutely mad.
Jonathan M. F. Catalán: Stranger: He deserves to have his death forgotten, as it soon will be. I consider that fair.
His death is in fact the test of the significance of his theories. If there continues to be "Samuelsonians," much like there continues to be Misesians, Rothbardians, Friedmanians, Marxians, etc, then he was a significant thinker.
If no one wants to hold on to his ideas, it is because he was nothing more than an opportunist.
The fallacies of intellectual communism, a compilation - On the nature of power
Stranger: His death is in fact the test of the significance of his theories. If there continues to be "Samuelsonians," much like there continues to be Misesians, Rothbardians, Friedmanians, Marxians, etc, then he was a significant thinker. If no one wants to hold on to his ideas, it is because he was nothing more than an opportunist.
That must make Aristotle lord of all.
'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael
Student:I'm simply at a loss. Even if you dislike Keynesian economics, in fact, even if you think that Keynesian economics has been counterproductive in science and perhaps damaging in the real world of policy, how much have the damages been????
Student: You yourself compared Paul Samuelson to anti-semetic, Nazi Economist Gottfried Feder!!! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gottfried_Feder Aside from the fact that both of these men are economists, I see absolutely NO comparison at all between them!!
Aside from the fact that both of these men are economists, I see absolutely NO comparison at all between them!!
yes, they were both economists, and it is the questionable value of what they advocate politically that constitutes the comparison. I never claimed Paul Samuelson was anti-semitic. he was anti-capitalist .perhaps?... anti-libertarian. why not?. anti-leaving-innocent-people-alone-with-their-private-property... oh boy!
to emphasise that Gottfried Feder, was a NAZI and anti-semetic, and make a big hoopla about mentioning him in the same breath as an economist like Keynes, Samuelson or Krugman is simply to dodge the question over whether what they actually advocated, as economic policy, had merit, as economic policy, or whether they deserve to be disparaged, and even loathed for that advocacy
now presumably you don't say that 'if one overlooks his anti-semitism' Gottfried Feder was just as good an economist and just as good an advocate as Paul Samuelson...? I assume you recognise that the content of the policy he advocated was nefarious. it seems like you are only willing to admit that bad economics advocates are 'bad' if they have other failings.... as their badness is never related to their economics advocation.
If I pick any economist that advocated destructive and foolish and cruel policies and also is associated, and had some other affiliations with evil, you will point to this 'other affiliation' and say that his evil is there and not in his economic advocatism, and you would thereby perpetually escape having to consider whether all economic advocates are as worthy as any other.
so set aside the fact that Gottfried Feder was a Nazi and was an Anti-Semite, and judge the economic advocate. and then do the same for Samuelson.(the judging not the setting aside)
Maybe your thoughts will not change, maybe they will. experiment.
That^
Except I don't get what you mean about his thoughts changing. Why would they?