• Sprott Money
    05/05/2016 - 06:02
    Why is a Deutsche Bank mouthpiece suggesting “negative retail deposit rates or perhaps wealth taxes”? The answer is to (supposedly) stimulate our economies.

150 Economists Sign Letter Against Increase Of US Debt; Spoiler Alert - Paul Krugman Is Not Among Them

Tyler Durden's picture




 
0
Your rating: None
 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:27 | 1328172 Josh Randall
Josh Randall's picture

These people are obviously paid shills for the "little people" whom do not want austerity

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:42 | 1328223 Clueless Economist
Clueless Economist's picture

I did not sign the letter, but rather I advise that we increase the debt by $5 Trillion in order to create or save 5 Million shovel-ready jobs.

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:47 | 1328265 Mr. Poon
Mr. Poon's picture

You're losing your touch.  The amount the government should spend should be "Whatever number I am thinking--only bigger!"

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:52 | 1328277 Fish Gone Bad
Fish Gone Bad's picture

Krugman is an interesting conundrum.  He is 50% proud of himself, 20% clueless, 20% genius, 9% pure fucking evil, and 1% sycophant.

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 11:34 | 1328867 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture

all of you idiots above me are fucking Moe-Rons!

 

1. $18 Trillion Dollars in 3 years printed out of thin air.. ALL went to Bankers / AAA Rated Corps! NOT to the Poor.

2. You ALL are fucking idiots!

 

http://www.banktech.com/articles/229700093?cid=nl_bnk_daily

Top U.S. Lobbying Banks Got Biggest Bailouts

 

http://goo.gl/FnxBZ  Treasury Direct $14 Trillion Debt

http://goo.gl/TMl74   $15 Trillion in Loans

http://goo.gl/EXzal  / ='s $29T

 

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/BASE 3 Years 300% More Dollars Printed Out of Thin Air!

 

Corporations Own the Lobby!

 

The Lobby Owns the Government!

 

Law Enforcement works for the Duly Elected Lobby Whores!

 

“We the People” are Screwed!

 

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 11:46 | 1328955 Swurveman
Swurveman's picture

I didn't see anything in the letter about raising revenues.

The translation of this letter is: "fuck the poor and the elderly".

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 12:28 | 1329190 taint
taint's picture

Nah, it says, fuck the nonsavers and imprudent...as the savers and productive are fucked out. 

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 13:35 | 1329493 SRV - ES339
SRV - ES339's picture

Absolutely... I'm sure they're all supported by the Chamber of Commerce and believe lower taxes for entrepreneurs (rich), gutting regulation (it worked so well last time), and ending all those pesky, expensive and unnecessary support programs for the poor and elderly is the only way to prosparity (patriots all).

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 15:44 | 1329930 maximin thrax
maximin thrax's picture

That's because increased taxes only change who will spend the money into the economy. The game now afoot is to maintain GDP at above-depression levels (who wants to be known as the prez during the second great depression?). That requires net credit expansion, which only the federal government is capable of providing.

Borrowing leads to a net increase in spending (until you have to pay it back). When government lets you hold onto your dollar (tax cut) and borrows that dollar instead, two bucks get spent into the economy. Of course, eventually, you do start paying back the debt with interest (instead of endless rollovers). So instead of supplementing a dollar of tax revenue with a dollar of debt, the federal government will have to take that dollar, and another in interest, out of future spending on programs for the poor and elderly to pay back the dollar borrowed today.

Regardless of who has a problem with it, this government is going to continue to borrow money to spend as long as GDP would plunge to depression levels without its deficit spending. First it was TARP, then a big economic stimulus bill, now 99 weeks of unemployment. Anything that sounds good and generous that accomplishes the required trillions credit expansion will be sold to the public, who out of self interest can't say no to the freebies. Through constant rolling-over of debt and interest rate suppression by the Fed, Americans (until the current bout with inflation) really haven't felt the pain of all that borrowing, so they can't comprehend the cost.

And to accommodate that borrowing the Fed will maintain low interest rates with a glut of money. This nation cannot service her debt, let alone add to it, without artificially low interest rates. Deflationists don't believe one can experience inflation without rising wages, but clearly the mechanism for government's infusion of money into people's hands through safety nets and bail-outs is in place. The question is how far will government go. The answer is until it breaks.

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 19:08 | 1330667 cranky-old-geezer
cranky-old-geezer's picture

There simply isn't enoung money to support casino-gambling bankers, crony corporations, and poor / elderly too. 

Casino-gambling bankers and crony corporations create jobs, poor / elderly don't. 

Get your prorities right. 

Casino-gambling bankers and crony corporations will eventually need 50 - 75 trillion to create jobs, so raise the debt ceiling to 100 trillion for pete's sake. 

We gotta have those jobs.  No amount of money printing is too much to create those jobs.

/sarc

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:37 | 1328182 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture

Paul Krugman's anxiously awaited, Nobel Laureate worthy economic treatise is about to be released.

It's titled:

'How the U.S. Government Can Have Bernanke Print The Number of Dollars Equal to Our Current National Debt In Order To Pay Off Existing Creditors, Thus Wiping Said Debt Out, And Also Send Every American A Gift Card in The Form of Pre-Paid Visa With a Balance of $100,000 BernankBux.'

 

In his great and bold proposal, Krugman argues forcefully that this plan would strengthen the USD, which is a core goal of Bernanke & Geithner (and NerObama), and how it this would also help achieve the new full employment rate incorporating a 30% UE figure, while helping to stabilize prices of all goods and services (especially food and energy).


Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:34 | 1328191 LRC Fan
LRC Fan's picture

Cue Clueless Economist with his analysis and prediction...

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:52 | 1328278 Mr. Poon
Mr. Poon's picture

It should be noted that Krugman has shown little to no concern over the strength of the dollar.

But beyond that, yes, his implied plan is more or less to print enough money to meet all the government's obligations as well as provide full employment for every person in the U.S.  He doesn't put it in those stark terms because he knows fully well he would (rightly) be ridiculed for it, so he just hints and suggests and insinuates and implies.

And again, he has no interest in what impact those policies would have on the USD; and to the related concern, that massive expansion would push interest rates up, his defense has basically been "it hasn't happened yet so there's nothing to worry about".  The old "I'm not dead yet so I must be immortal" argument, only in economic terms.

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 11:01 | 1328641 Libertarian777
Libertarian777's picture

Krugman's follow up book will be:

"War on Iran. How a 30 year protracted military engagement will solve unemployment, construction, healthcare and boost GDP"

In his Pulitzer prize willing sequel, Krugman proves unequivocally that a conventional war with Iran would be a boost for the defense industry. The full 'free market' privatisation of the military (which produces some of the highest paying contracting jobs, such as $250,000 truck driver salaries), will attract large swathes of the 8.9% unemployed, and those on food stamps to join Xe.

The tens of thousands that are maimed and injured in the ensuing war will ensure a robust growth industry in the healthcare sector.

And the amount of tomahawks and bombs that will be used will significantly increase the demand for US steel and US chemicals (but not silver or gold of course...those remain barbarous relics), which will be a boon to those industries.

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:34 | 1328183 White.Star.Line
White.Star.Line's picture

I for one want austerity - for the banksters.

Also, severe poverty and starvation. (Give em a taste of their own medicine)

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:36 | 1328187 Henry Chinaski
Henry Chinaski's picture

People are waking up.  Now economists are waking up too.

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:52 | 1328281 Dr. Richard Head
Dr. Richard Head's picture

200 economists spoke out against the bailouts - http://thebeezbuzz.com/pdf/cato_stimulus.pdf

That didn't seem to put a dent in the fascism mobile though.

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:34 | 1328192 SilverDosed
SilverDosed's picture

Seeing as how the Univ of Texas bought a Billion in gold (wonder who first pitched that idea) I'd have to say....

silver bitchez

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:35 | 1328199 AssFire
AssFire's picture

I've said it before and I'll say it again, We are now two separate nations:

One that works (in the private sector) and pays taxes vs those that live off the stolen wealth of the taxpayer. <We are the new slaves>

http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/05/31/3117145/dallas-fort-worth-again-...

We prefer to be our own nation. In Texas we reject the welfare state and hope we can finally shed the nation that forced it's citizens at gunpoint to enslave us.

Now send us our gold and leave us the fuck alone.

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:55 | 1328295 Dr. Richard Head
Dr. Richard Head's picture

Hard to reject the Federales when they threaten "no-fly" zones because of a proposed TSA molestation bill - www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GAZK0x_m-U

The UN will suddenly find nuclear bombs being made by the Texas state legislature if the bread is cut out.

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 10:42 | 1328526 Pegasus Muse
Pegasus Muse's picture

In Texas we reject the welfare state and hope we can finally shed the nation that forced it's citizens at gunpoint to enslave us.

This from a citizen of the state that produced LBJ, creator of the Great Society and Commander in Chief who directed a huge military expansion in Viet Nam War.  lol

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 11:41 | 1328915 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture

Bush! no oil in texas to be found!

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 11:47 | 1328969 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

No military contractors in Texas sucking at the teat of the Military Industrial Complex, either.

Nope - nothing but self-sufficiency and rugged individualism (except when the 'country' was founded using Uncle Sam's weapons and strong-arming).

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 11:32 | 1328859 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

The 'private sector' RELIES UPON 2 things, fundamentally:  looting from the public and assistance from government, which they own, in doing so.

You may not have noticed, but that has been true for about the last 5 centuries. 

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:41 | 1328216 ATM
ATM's picture

Kyle Bass....

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 11:40 | 1328936 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture

he spends all his time in st barts!

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:37 | 1328193 Jayda1850
Jayda1850's picture

but with all the damage done by the tornadoes, that should be worth atleast 1% GDP growth. Just think of all the demand that is created.

 

 

sarc/

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 10:11 | 1328354 Thisson
Thisson's picture

I was speaking with a financial advisor from Morgan Stanley the other day who told me that the tornadoes are good for the economy.

I tried telling him about Bastiat's fallacy, but it was pointless.

The point is that people actually believe the Keynesian claptrap that prosperity comes from endlessly expanding credit and printing money.

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 10:34 | 1328489 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture

If tornadoes are good, tsunamis and earthquakes (wiping out nuclear power plants and breaching their containment structures) are better, and atomic warfare is the best stimulus of all.

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 19:12 | 1330717 cranky-old-geezer
cranky-old-geezer's picture

And Fukushima should be good for ...gosh ...5% GDP growth minimum.

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:35 | 1328197 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Clearly 150 economists don't equal one Paul Krugman because only Paul Krugman is the official keeper of the public (financial) myth and thus a MSM darling.

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 10:46 | 1328531 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture

Chuck Norris refuses to debate Paul Krugman.

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:35 | 1328200 Cleanclog
Cleanclog's picture

Watch Inside Job for more on the paid for shills, expert witnesses, and absurb "think tanks".

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:36 | 1328205 lizzy36
lizzy36's picture

150 economists all looking for a paid gig on fox news.

Color me shocked.

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 10:47 | 1328566 tarsubil
tarsubil's picture

You mean Faux News? Der-di-der-di-der!

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:36 | 1328208 willien1derland
willien1derland's picture

Where the HELL were all these economists when 'No-Doc' & 'Pick-A-Pay' mortgages skewed the housing markets....Again, WHERE the hell are all these economists regarding the impact of derivative exposure??? 

 

Ohhh sorry THAT'S right...they all received record bonuses due to the decision to socialize all Wall Street & Banksters losses...Paaathetic! 

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:37 | 1328211 wisefool
wisefool's picture

<sarc> Why is Krugman not on there? Was the document format incompatible with his I-Pad</sarc>

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:40 | 1328212 theMAXILOPEZpsycho
theMAXILOPEZpsycho's picture

Its frightening how much less I'd know about economics had I studied economics in university

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 10:13 | 1328374 Thisson
Thisson's picture

Don't succumb to that.  I studied economics and it's helped me to understand why the shit most economists say is wrong: because economics makes a lot of assumptions that are not valid in the real world (e.g. perfect information, manipulation-free markets, etc.).

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 10:43 | 1328514 theMAXILOPEZpsycho
theMAXILOPEZpsycho's picture

was it really worth spending 3-4 years just to learn that??

why not just read the right books instead of being forced to read all the wrong ones?

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 11:25 | 1328816 skipjack
skipjack's picture

...because some non-Ivy college econ departments actually teach Austrian economics...

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 11:30 | 1328869 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

LIQUIDATE EDUCATION!  LIQUIDATE PUBLIC HEALTH!

Up with deflation and genocide!

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 13:31 | 1329478 Urban Redneck
Urban Redneck's picture

because economics makes a lot of assumptions that are not valid in the real world

It starts on the very first day, even before university level economics - ceteris paribus - everything else is never equal in the real world.

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:38 | 1328221 digalert
digalert's picture

Can't believe you mention Krugman...he's a Nobel Laureate. Barama's got one of them Nobel doohickeys too.

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 10:18 | 1328376 NidStyles
NidStyles's picture

That beg's the question, does a Nobel Prize measure the quality of the recipient, or the quality of the Isntitution that award's it. Note the lack of the question mark.

 

 

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:43 | 1328228 BlackholeDivestment
BlackholeDivestment's picture

...an economist named ''Booth'' at ''Chapman'' University!!!

I'm gonna take a ''shot in the dark'' on this one, bet he's one of those ''economist hitmen''. Paging Mr. Black http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-pR0MOJKZM

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:42 | 1328229 Caviar Emptor
Caviar Emptor's picture

But again....we know what they're against....but what are they For?

It's easier to criticize than to perform. And we got plenty of critics on both sides. I'm the first to say we should not have the debt that we do (but to me the mistakes were made 30-40 years ago).

But there isn't a single one of these Nobel Laureate crowned heads, not a single economics genius nor a single political "leader" who has a proposal on how to re-structure and re-tool for the future given the new realities. 

Why? Because most don't even  believe we should change anything. Most are defending an economic or political construct that they themselves endorsed and supported. They bet the farm on it. Others simply can't possibly not be backing the status quo. ANY status quo. If they were living in fascist Germany they would back it. But for the most part, the main reason we;re in a slump is because there's a slump in ideas, creativity and leadership. 

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 09:57 | 1328284 I am a Man I am...
I am a Man I am Forty's picture

nonsense, cut spending, it's not complicated, you don't need ideas or creativity, it's quit fucking spending, it's not rocket science, all these people that are living off of everyone else are going to have to live less off everyone else

 

Wed, 06/01/2011 - 10:18 | 1328388 Thisson
Thisson's picture

There are too many recipients receiving government spending - it's the "tyranny of the majority" problem.  The Grasshoppers outnumber the Ants in the voting booths.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!