Current Events

Re: The Ultimate Krugman Take-Down

John James — Mon, 16 Jul 2012 04:52:17 GMT

DiLorenzo posted a nice cut of the best segment of the debate on LRC Blog:

Spanish Austrian School economist Pedro Schwartz exposes Paul Krugman as the intellectual dinosaur that he is. (Video includes a cameo appearance by Mark Thornton).

(Please visit the site to view this media)

Re: The Ultimate Krugman Take-Down

John James — Sat, 14 Jul 2012 23:56:29 GMT

An EPJ Reader Calls Out Krugman on His Urging of the Fed to Create a Housing Bubble [VIDEO]

Krugman's "Joke"

Re: The Ultimate Krugman Take-Down

shackleford — Sat, 14 Jul 2012 23:38:13 GMT

Paul Krugman is a pompous jackass. The fawning over him towards the end was disgusting.

I only listened to Pedro Schwartz's speech and his answer at the end. I like how he pointed out the vilification of Austrian/free market people as really just being callous towards those poor unemployed individuals. Talk about ad hominem and straw man! Even if they didn't care, that doesn't refute the merits of their arguments.

Re: The Ultimate Krugman Take-Down

Rcder — Sat, 14 Jul 2012 22:11:33 GMT

Didn't Murphy publicly withdraw his prediction of high inflation? I mean, obviously an expansion in the money supply won't affect prices if it's being stored in bank reserves because the Fed is paying them above-the-market interest rates to do so.

Re: The Ultimate Krugman Take-Down

John James — Sat, 14 Jul 2012 21:57:22 GMT

From EconomicPolicyJournal:

Krugman Double Feature Punch Out

Travis Holte emails:

Krugman confronted on Murphy challenge. Hilarity ensues.

(Please visit the site to view this media)

Re: The Ultimate Krugman Take-Down

Peter Sidor — Wed, 11 Jul 2012 21:41:48 GMT

Jonathan M. F. Catalán:
Nevertheless, I think this is from the question and answers session of the same debate, here is Krugman's response when asked on his advocacy of the housing bubble: "I was joking."

Perfect bit! :)

Re: The Ultimate Krugman Take-Down

Autolykos — Wed, 11 Jul 2012 12:26:41 GMT

John James:
Yeah I did. That made it obvious it was meant in humor and he wasn't honestly suggesting a Nobel makes one automatically correct or something of that nature.

But the fact that Krugman has a Nobel was directly addressed and shot down in the debate (and then quoted in the summary). So it doesn't quite work even as a joke.

Apparently others thought it still worked as a joke.

John James:
And the way the OP is formatted, it's kind of cumbersome to read and follow, so I was curious to know if he even read the full summary before posting that.

So you're saying that, when you asked Bogart "Did you even ready the summary?", that wasn't your way of saying "WHAT ARE YOU STUPID OR SOMETHING?! GOD!!!"?

Re: The Ultimate Krugman Take-Down

jodiphour — Wed, 11 Jul 2012 01:33:23 GMT

I nly listened to Krugman's response. He probably unfairly mistook the criticism of him as a personal attack. But I thought his response was spot on! ;)

Re: The Ultimate Krugman Take-Down

John James — Wed, 11 Jul 2012 00:48:37 GMT

That's why I was curious if he read the entire summary.

Re: The Ultimate Krugman Take-Down

Malachi — Tue, 10 Jul 2012 23:40:27 GMT

But the fact that Krugman has a Nobel was directly addressed and shot down in the debate (and then quoted in the summary). So it doesn't quite work even as a joke. It would be like someone saying: "JK Rowling has of course sold millions of copies. But simply writing a popular best-selling book doesn't automatically mean you know what you're talking about...especially when you pontificate in matters outside of your specialty." And someone responds "Oh, but she has a book that sold millions of copies!"

Perhaps you hadnt noticed, but debates with keynesians do tend to follow that same pattern, i.e. Poor argument/refutation/repetition of poor argument.

Re: The Ultimate Krugman Take-Down

John James — Tue, 10 Jul 2012 23:07:11 GMT

gocrew:
Did you even read his semi-colon/dash/closed parenthesis? ;-)

Yeah I did. That made it obvious it was meant in humor and he wasn't honestly suggesting a Nobel makes one automatically correct or something of that nature.

But the fact that Krugman has a Nobel was directly addressed and shot down in the debate (and then quoted in the summary). So it doesn't quite work even as a joke.

It would be like someone saying: "JK Rowling has of course sold millions of copies. But simply writing a popular best-selling book doesn't automatically mean you know what you're talking about...especially when you pontificate in matters outside of your specialty." And someone responds "Oh, but she has a book that sold millions of copies!"

And the way the OP is formatted, it's kind of cumbersome to read and follow, so I was curious to know if he even read the full summary before posting that.

Re: The Ultimate Krugman Take-Down

Esuric — Tue, 10 Jul 2012 18:54:20 GMT

I thought the Austrian's performance in the debate was rather poor, and he came off as somewhat incoherent. He also failed to respond to Kruman's so-called "definitive refutation" of what he calls "supply-side economics." There is no clear, 1-1 relationship between high-powered money and prices; interest rates remain low in the face of high government spending due to the monetization of debt (alleviated the crowding-out-effect); no one believes that sharp cuts in fiscal expenditure yield automatic stimulative results.

Re: The Ultimate Krugman Take-Down

vive la insurrection — Tue, 10 Jul 2012 17:52:19 GMT

I actually like Krugman's answer / perspective around the 1:40ish mark to the inflation is theft question. The real concern is the monoplization of money by a central power, not some guarantee by a currency

Re: The Ultimate Krugman Take-Down

gotlucky — Tue, 10 Jul 2012 17:18:44 GMT

gocrew:

Did you even read his semi-colo/dash/closed parenthesis? ;-)

Lmao. Well played.

Re: The Ultimate Krugman Take-Down

gocrew — Tue, 10 Jul 2012 16:05:11 GMT

John James:
Did you even read the summary?

Did you even read his semi-colon/dash/closed parenthesis? ;-)