Paul Krugman economics: Deny, deny, deny!

[budcampbell]

This debate will be decided by what happens in the US Treasury Bond Market in the days and months ahead. And all indications point to an unhappy ending, absent a massive economic boom.

 

[Max E.]

Quote from gwb-trading:

A well-reasoned basically-polite debate on the merits of policy.

Who ever thought it would happen in the P&R forum of ET. (This is ET right? I did not get an url re-direct to an alternative universe, eh?).

I am going to stab you in the dickhole with a rusty pick axe.







(Sorry Cant let this place get too civil.....)

 

[gwb-trading]

Quote from Max E. Pad:

I am going to stab you in the dickhole with a rusty pick axe.







(Sorry Cant let this place get too civil.....)

At last.... balance is restored in the ET P&R universe.

 

[Max E.]

Quote from gwb-trading:

At last.... balance is restored in the ET P&R universe.

 

[pspr]

Quote from gwb-trading:

A well-reasoned basically-polite debate on the merits of policy.

Who ever thought it would happen in the P&R forum of ET. (This is ET right? I did not get an url re-direct to an alternative universe, eh?).

Maybe we could get futurecurrents involved in the QE debate to liven it up and make sure it doesn't move forward. Oh, wait. He doesn't know anything about the topics he argues already!

 

[Max E.]

Quote from piezoe:

I
Keynes has been criticized on a number of grounds. One such criticism is that he was not successful in formalizing his theories in rigorous mathematical models. [Others later tried to!] Because I don't believe economics is a science, I find these criticisms absurd. I am firmly in the Soros camp. I believe that neither the "Efficient Markets Theorem" nor "Market Equilibrium Theory" correctly describe real markets. Real markets don't go spontaneously toward equilibrium. Real markets are virtually always distorted. Real markets are not efficient, at least not in the textbook sense.

This paragraph in and of itself is enough to show exactly why commies are dead wrong.

In your diatribe you use people like greenspan as an example of why the free market doesnt work, except greenspan is the text book defitniition of a centrally planned economy. There was no free market under greenspan, its kind of funy that you would even imply that was a frree market when rates and lending standards were intentionally kept artificially low.

To blame our faults in the U.S. on the "free market" is almost as idiotic as blaming the housing bubble in China on the free market, at the same time the government forces them to invest in real estate.

 

[budcampbell]

My understanding of economics was forged during the late 1970's. early 1980's with Milton Friedman and of course Volcker's unpopular, but necessary decisions as Fed Chairman. Then came LTCM in 1998 and bubble-land was aided and abetted by Greenspan and the current crop of adherents. I have had to throw out the Econ. textbooks, and find only Jim Sinclair and Martin Armstrong worth reading. Krugman should change fields of endeavor and get out of economics, but there has to be two sides. Just an opinion.

 

[PHOENIX TRADING]

Quote from Lucrum:

I think the pie guy just got owned, not to put too fine a point on it.

Perhaps pie should have answered my questions instead , since I've never needed to take a college econ class in my life.

 

[denner]

Quote from Max E. Pad:

This paragraph in and of itself is enough to show exactly why commies are dead wrong.

In your diatribe you use people like greenspan as an example of why the free market doesnt work, except greenspan is the text book defitniition of a centrally planned economy. There was no free market under greenspan, its kind of funy that you would even imply that was a frree market when rates and lending standards were intentionally kept artificially low.

To blame our faults in the U.S. on the "free market" is almost as idiotic as blaming the housing bubble in China on the free market, at the same time the government forces them to invest in real estate.

Well put, Max.

 

[pspr]

Quote from budcampbell:

My understanding of economics was forged during the late 1970's. early 1980's with Milton Friedman and of course Volcker's unpopular, but necessary decisions as Fed Chairman. Then came LTCM in 1998 and bubble-land was aided and abetted by Greenspan and the current crop of adherents. I have had to throw out the Econ. textbooks, and find only Jim Sinclair and Martin Armstrong worth reading. Krugman should change fields of endeavor and get out of economics, but there has to be two sides. Just an opinion.

Krugman's field of endeavor is economics? I thought it was politics. :eek: