This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Guest Post: Wealth Inequality – Spitznagel Gets It, Krugman Doesn’t

Tyler Durden's picture


Submitted by Pater Tenebrarum of Acting Man

Wealth Inequality – Spitznagel Gets It, Krugman Doesn’t

We wrote an article on wealth and income inequality on July 1 2011, in which we criticized a speech by Fed governing board member Sarah Bloom Raskin. In her speech she bemoaned the growing wealth and income gap in the US, indicating that more government intervention was needed to close it.

We started out by asking: why should it even matter how wealth is distributed as long as everybody partakes of the fruits of the free market? Should not those who serve consumers better than others be entitled to earn more? Are they not taking risks? Who cares if income and wealth are unequally distributed as long as everybody's living standard increases?

Most readers are probably aware of these arguments, so there is no need to rehash them here. The point we finally made was that the reason people were worried – besides envy, that is – was that the great mass of people has not seen its economic lot improve for a long time period.

The time period during which the real income of the middle class and the poorer strata among the citizenry began to stagnate  curiously coincided  with the abandonment of the gold exchange standard and the unfettered growth in money and credit that followed on its heels.

So the question that suggested itself was: perhaps the Fed itself is at fault?

This is what we concluded, but not merely from the empirical data, as supportive as they are of this particular case. It follows logically that whenever an inflationary policy is pursued, the richest citizens will profit from it, while the poorest will lose ground. Inflation is effectively a reverse redistribution scheme from the poor to the rich. This is so because the wealth of the rich is largely parked in assets the prices of which tend to rise disproportionally due to the inflationary policy. Moreover, they have easier access to credit and thus can get 'first dibs' on newly created money. By the time this money has percolated through the economy and reaches the wage earners and the poor,  prices have already risen and they will be confronted with the fact that their purchasing power has declined.

We concluded it was hypocritical of a Fed board member to decry the situation while not even once mentioning the critical role her institution played in bringing it about. Moreover, her proposed solution, while not spelled out in detail, amounted implicitly to a recommendation to the government to go down the path of socialist redistribution.

Mark Spitznagel on Wealth Inequality

You have to hand it to the WSJ – eventually it sometimes catches up to 'acting man'. :)

Well known hedge fund manager Mark Spitznagel has published an editorial  in the WSJ last week, in which he basically makes our argument all over again – only for a bigger audience.

He writes:

“A major issue in this year's presidential campaign is the growing disparity between rich and poor, the 1% versus the 99%. While the president's solutions differ from those of his likely Republican opponent, they both ignore a principal source of this growing disparity.


The source is not runaway entrepreneurial capitalism, which rewards those who best serve the consumer in product and price. (Would we really want it any other way?) There is another force that has turned a natural divide into a chasm: the Federal Reserve. The relentless expansion of credit by the Fed creates artificial disparities based on political privilege and economic power.


David Hume, the 18th-century Scottish philosopher, pointed out that when money is inserted into the economy (from a government printing press or, as in Hume's time, the importation of gold and silver), it is not distributed evenly but "confined to the coffers of a few persons, who immediately seek to employ it to advantage."


In the 20th century, the economists of the Austrian school built upon this fact as their central monetary tenet. Ludwig von Mises and his students demonstrated how an increase in money supply is beneficial to those who get it first and is detrimental to those who get it last. Monetary inflation is a process, not a static effect. To think of it only in terms of aggregate price levels (which is all Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke seems capable of) is to ignore this pernicious process and the imbalance and economic dislocation that it creates.


As Mises protégé Murray Rothbard explained, monetary inflation is akin to counterfeiting, which necessitates that some benefit and others don't. After all, if everyone counterfeited in proportion to their wealth, there would be no real economic benefit to anyone. Similarly, the expansion of credit is uneven in the economy, which results in wealth redistribution. To borrow a visual from another Mises student, Friedrich von Hayek, the Fed's money creation does not flow evenly like water into a tank, but rather oozes like honey into a saucer, dolloping one area first and only then very slowly dribbling to the rest.


The Fed doesn't expand the money supply by uniformly dropping cash from helicopters over the hapless masses. Rather, it directs capital transfers to the largest banks (whether by overpaying them for their financial assets or by lending to them on the cheap), minimizes their borrowing costs, and lowers their reserve requirements. All of these actions result in immediate handouts to the financial elite first, with the hope that they will subsequently unleash this fresh capital onto the unsuspecting markets, raising demand and prices wherever they do.”

(emphasis added)

Very well put – this is precisely what happens. Money is not 'neutral' – the uneven spreading of inflation guarantees that there are winners and losers. It is obvious that the financial elite is foremost among the winners. The so-called '99%' meanwhile are losing out and the lower they are in the income strata, the more they tend to proportionally lose.

Spitznagel concludes:

The Fed is transferring immense wealth from the middle class to the most affluent, from the least privileged to the most privileged. This coercive redistribution has been a far more egregious source of disparity than the president's presumption of tax unfairness (if there is anything unfair about approximately half of a population paying zero income taxes) or deregulation.


Pitting economic classes against each other is a divisive tactic that benefits no one. Yet if there is any upside, it is perhaps a closer examination of the true causes of the problem. Before we start down the path of arguing about the merits of redistributing wealth to benefit the many, why not first stop redistributing it to the most privileged?”

(emphasis added)

Note here that as a hedge fund manager, Spitznagel himself is among the privileged who are in a position to profit from the Fed's largesse. Of course he would probably prefer to invest an environment of sound money, as the constant second-guessing of what the bureaucrats might do next is actually distracting investors from what they should really do, namely appraise the individual fundamental merits of various investment alternatives. As we often point out, these days investing is instead all about the 'macro' environment  – which is to say much valuable time and effort must be spent on deciphering and dealing with the effects of interventionism.

Naturally, whenever someone attacks the policies of an institution that keeps hundreds of macro-economists in bread, it doesn't take long for the the counter-attacks to be launched. This time Paul Krugman took it upon himself to defend the money printers, revealing his utter ignorance in the process.

Krugman's Weak Defense of Money Printing

Krugman tried to deflect Spitznagel's arguments from his perch at the NYT in an article entitled 'Plutocrats and Printing Presses'.

As we have pointed out in the past, Krugman is either willfully ignoring and misrepresenting the arguments of Austrian economists, or he simply doesn't understand them. Looking at his past critiques of the Austrian school, it seems rather obvious he hasn't even read any of the works associated with it, so he is actually in no position to pen a serious critique. The Austrians are generally in a better position when it comes to criticizing Krugman, since most of them had to endure large doses of Keynesianism at university.

Krugman made a tactical mistake though: by coming to the defense of the Fed's bank bailouts and its money printing, he apparently managed to incense his own fan base (see the comments section below his screed).

He writes:

What’s wrong with the idea that running the printing presses is a giveaway to plutocrats? Let me count the ways.


First, as Joe Wiesenthal  (sic) and Mike Konczal both point out, the actual politics is utterly the reverse of what’s being claimed. Quantitative easing isn’t being imposed on an unwitting populace by financiers and rentiers; it’s being undertaken, to the extent that it is, over howls of protest from the financial industry. I mean, where are the editorials in the WSJ demanding that the Fed raise its inflation target?

So a winner of the Nobel prize in economics requires the testimony of Joe Weisenthal and someone from the 'Next New Deal' blog (which as the name implies is in favor of an FDR style command economy) to buttress his arguments? And proof that 'QE' is happening over the 'howls of protest from the financial industry' is provided by a lack of editorials in the WSJ demanding a higher 'inflation target'?

It is difficult to reply to this nonsense mainly because it is so utterly dumb. One almost doesn't know where to begin, but let us just 'count the ways' by mentioning two small factoids: without the Fed's interventions, many of the stalwarts of the financial industry would no longer be with us. They would have gone bankrupt in 2008-9 and their assets would now be in the hands of better stewards of capital. Yeah, they sure 'howled in protest' when they were presented with that gift horse.

Secondly, the true broad money supply in the US has increased from $5.3 trillion to $8.424 trillion between January of 2008 and February of 2012. This is a money supply inflation of roughly 60% in four years. There are simply no WSJ editorials clamoring for 'more inflation' required, even if one believes in the inflationist snake oil peddled by the likes of Krugman. The people supporting the policy are probably eager not draw too much attention to what has actually happened thus far on the inflation front.

Having exonerated (in his mind) the financial elite and the 'plutocrats' with the help of Mr Weisenthal's testimony – whose stance is (mis)informed by none other than Paul Krugman himself (i.e., Krugman actually uses his own testimony through a relay station) -  Krugman continues:

“Beyond that, let’s talk about the economics


The naive (or deliberately misleading) version of Fed policy is the claim that Ben Bernanke is “giving money” to the banks. What it actually does, of course, is buy stuff, usually short-term government debt but nowadays sometimes other stuff. It’s not a gift.


To claim that it’s effectively a gift you have to claim that the prices the Fed is paying are artificially high, or equivalently that interest rates are being pushed artificially low. And you do in fact see assertions to that effect all the time. But if you think about it for even a minute, that claim is truly bizarre.


I mean, what is the un-artificial, or if you prefer, “natural” rate of interest? As it turns out, there is actually a standard definition of the natural rate of interest, coming from Wicksell, and it’s basically defined on a PPE basis (that’s for proof of the pudding is in the eating). Roughly, the natural rate of interest is the rate that would lead to stable inflation at more or less full employment.”

(emphasis added)

First of all it should be noted that in his typical demagogic fashion, Krugman does not even address the argument Spitznagel made. He always does that – he really would be great as a leader of a Marxist debating society, as he has their techniques down pat. He simply ignores what his opponents say, and then proceeds to erect straw men which he thinks can be easily knocked down.

Well, let's look at his voodoo economics claims (how on earth did this guy get a Nobel prize in economics? If ever you needed proof that the prize has become a contrary indicator, Krugman provides it in spades). First of all, you will notice that he fails to mention how exactly the Fed comes into a position to 'buy stuff'. It does that by printing money from thin air, which is actually the central point of Spitznagel's critique. Let's just ignore it!

Then he claims that one can not prove that the Fed 'overpays' for the assets it buys. This is the functional equivalent of claiming that increasing the money supply has no effect whatsoever on prices. How can an economist make such a claim? Not to forget, the reason why the Fed makes these purchases consists  – in its own words – of its desire to depress interest rates! In reality, the entire price structure of the economy is revolutionized when the amount of fiduciary media is increased and interest rates are artificially suppressed by the monetary authority. Lastly, the banks and other financial players the Fed buys assets from are not led by complete dummies. They naturally front-run the Fed every time – there is in other words a clearly discernible feedback loop between the Fed's activities and the prices of the financial assets it buys.

As to Wicksell's definition of the natural interest rate, it reads verbatim:

“There is a certain rate of interest on loans which is neutral in respect to commodity prices, and tends neither to raise nor to lower them.”

There is not one word there about 'full employment'. As to the Austrian definition of the natural interest rate, it is simply the rate of societal time preference. In other words, the time preferences of all market participants as expressed in the discount of future gods versus present goods represent the natural interest rate. If we actually wanted to establish what the natural interest rate is, we would indeed have to abolish the Fed as well as introduce 100% reserve banking, so as to forestall the issuance of fiduciary media. It is actually downright comical that we have a central economic planning agency that is allegedly trying to 'mimic' the natural interest rate when we could obtain it very easily by simply abolishing the planners and rigorously enforcing property rights.

Following his faux re-defintion of the natural interest rate, Krugman continues – n.b., while still completely ignoring the arguments Spitznagel made:

And we have low inflation with high unemployment, strongly suggesting that the natural rate of interest is below current levels, and that the key problem is the zero lower bound which keeps us from getting there. Under these circumstances, expansionary Fed policy isn’t some kind of giveway to the banks, it’s just an effort to give the economy what it needs.”

(emphasis added)

This is why we are so bold to accuse Kugman of using voodoo economics. Readers may be aware that the current interest rate is 'zero'. The Fed wants us to pretend that the cost of capital is zilch. Krugman now claims that the 'natural interest rate' – by his definition – should  actually be below zero. In other words, what he is saying is that if the market were left to its own devices, the time preferences of economic actors would be completely reversed, so that future goods would be considered to be worth more than present goods at the moment. This is such abject nonsense it truly defies belief.

Oh yes, and giving the banks money at no cost is therefore 'not a give-away to the banks'.  You would think no-one could actually make stuff like this up, but there it is. Economist William Anderson has given Krugman the nickname 'Krugpot'. Now you know why.

Krugman then expands on why the bankers really just hate to get money for absolutely free:

Furthermore, Fed efforts to do this probably tend on average to hurt, not help, bankers. Banks are largely in the business of borrowing short and lending long; anything that compresses the spread between short rates and long rates is likely to be bad for their profits. And the things the Fed is trying to do are in fact largely about compressing that spread, either by persuading investors that it will keep short rates at zero for a longer time or by going out and buying long-term assets. These are actions you would expect to make bankers angry, not happy — and that’s what has actually happened.”

First of all, the buying of long term assets to compress the yield curve spread is a relatively recent policy ('Operation Twist') and it is in fact not directly inflationary such as 'QE' was, as the Fed is not printing new money but merely exchanging short term bills for long term bonds. Its balance sheet has stopped growing when 'QE2' ended. However, we note that the expansion of the money supply has continued well beyond the end of 'QE2'.

There are several reasons for this – the most important are: the fractionally reserved commercial banks have actually begun to expand money and credit on their own again (with their current reserve base they could in theory create about $15 trillion in new money if we were to generously assume a required reserve ratio of 10%. In reality they could create far more money, as de facto, required reserves are close to zero, mainly on account of sweeps). Secondly, dollars have fled from the crisis stricken euro area and have been deposited with US banks – in short, some of the dollars that were overseas have 'come home', while the Fed and the ECB are acting in tandem to replace the dollars lost in Europe with freshly printed ones via their dollar swap window. Thirdly, there has been a rule change that has forced banks to acknowledge the existence of funds that have previously been regularly swept offshore overnight  – in short, the money supply data now contain evidence of past inflation that was previously hidden by this practice.

The claim that bankers are 'angry' at getting money at zero percent from the Fed is exactly as ludicrous as it sounds. Even with the yield spread now smaller, the banks are stuffing a lot of money into treasuries to 'ride the curve'. They simply lever these traded as much as they can. It's a trade in which they figure they cannot lose. Take for instance a two year and a one year note. The two year note now yield 27 basis points, the one year note yields 17 basis points. If one buys a two year note today, it will become a one year note one year hence. Given the Fed's 'guarantee' of a zero federal funds rate until 2014, this implies a certain capital gain plus the 27 basis points in interest. Lever the trade 100:1 and you're actually making serious money. Yes, the bankers just hate it!

We must however also note here that the assertion we have made above (namely that 'it's a trade in which they cannot lose') should be qualified by 'it's a trade in which they cannot lose as long as faith in the central bank administered fiat money system doesn't suddenly crumble'.

The two year note yield vs. the one year note yield. 'Riding the curve' with leveraged trades remains highly profitable as long as this spread is positive.



Krugman then continues to parade his ignorance as follows:

“Finally, how is expansionary monetary policy supposed to hurt the 99 percent? Think of all the people living on fixed incomes, we’re told. But who are these people? I know the picture: retirees living on the interest on their bank account and their fixed pension check — and there are no doubt some people fitting that description. But there aren’t many of them.”


The typical retired American these days relies largely on Social Security — which is indexed against inflation. He or she may get some interest income from bank deposits, but not much: ordinary Americans have fewer financial assets than the elite can easily imagine. And as for pensions: yes, some people have defined-benefit pension plans that aren’t indexed for inflation. But that’s a dwindling minority — and the effect of, say, 1 or 2 percent higher inflation isn’t going to be enormous even for this minority.

(emphasis added)

Countless seniors, widows and orphans would vehemently disagree with Mr. Krugman. There are currently about $6.3 trillion in savings deposit and about $730 billion in small time deposits. Via anecdotes, we keep hearing about senior citizens who feel they have no choice but to divert savings into the extremely risky stock market as they can no longer count on their interest income to sustain them. For Krugman (who himself is among the '1%') to wave all these people away as though they didn't exist is quite callous. As a good Keynesian he probably is all for 'euthanizing the rentiers', even if he doesn't spell it out here.

As to social security income being 'indexed for inflation': yes, indexed to the government's 'official' inflation data, which have been contorted in countless 'reforms' precisely to keep these expenses as low as possible by pretending that the price effects of the inflationary policy are far smaller than they actually are. He also ignores the fact that the basket of goods contained in the 'CPI' typically does not reflect the expenses that are most important for the majority of the middle class, the majority of retirees and the poor. Rich people don't care if the price of vegetables and fruit doubles and they don't care whether gasoline costs $2 per gallon or $4. Retirees living on social security, the middle class and the poor definitely do care about these prices and are hurt by them in spite of the laughable 'indexing' of social security payouts to 'inflation' (inflation as in the change of the 'general price level' as calculated by the government).

Krugman then closes his defense of inflationism with a for him typical demagogic flourish, only it really backfires in this case:

“No, the real victims of expansionary monetary policies are the very people who the current mythology says are pushing these policies. And that, I guess, explains why we’re hearing the opposite. It’s George Orwell’s world, and we’re just living in it.”

(emphasis added)

There you have it! The Fed's inflationary policy is really 'victimizing' the 1% and the financial elite! It is 'Orwellian' to say otherwise! Krugman is apparently completely unaware of the irony of this final sentence.

To summarize: Krugmann fails to address even a single one of the arguments forwarded by Spitznagel. This is no surprise, as he has often demonstrated he does not even understand the arguments of the Austrians and moreover has frequently shown that his style of debate consists largely of attempts to knock down straw men.  After appraising us of his economic ignorance (see the idea that time preferences can actually 'go negative' implied by his argument on the natural interest rate above), he finally closes a truly Orwellian screed by claiming that everybody who is critical of the Fed and the financial elite is guilty of being 'Orwellian'.

As we often say, you really couldn't make this up.

Self-appointed 'liberal conscience' guardian Paul Krugman: now he's suddenly springing to the defense of the financial elite and the '1%' in his misguided mission to defend central economic planning.


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sat, 04/28/2012 - 18:08 | 2382712 hedgeless_horseman
hedgeless_horseman's picture



Although my opinion may appear to contradict the wealth inequality theme of this article, I see Krugman as just another Ellsworth Toohey of our generation.

Having no true genius, Toohey's mission is to destroy excellence and promote altruism as the ultimate social ideal. This is put forward in one of his most memorable quotes: "Don't set out to raze all shrines—you'll frighten men. Enshrine mediocrity, and the shrines are razed."


Rather, Toohey's methods throughout the book suggest that such a regime might be able to retain the forms of democracy, multi-party elections and a free press, with actual power held by Toohey-like "informal advisers"

I simply could not read The Fountainhead and fail to notice the similarities between the tactics and rhetoric of Toohey and Krugman.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 18:08 | 2382740 Pladizow
Pladizow's picture

Can someone give an example of an economist/politician with a beard that can be trusted.

Krugman is the Ponzi's bitch!

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 18:45 | 2382775 fnord88
fnord88's picture

A krugman opens his mouth in New York, a million pensioners need food stamps in the burbs ( and 10 million peasants starve to death in the 3rd world). Law of unintended consequences, BITCHEZ

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:12 | 2382811 Aziz
Aziz's picture

Anyone looking for a cheap laugh (I know I am) might wanna check up on Paul Krugman's former economic persona, who sounded massively different to the one of today who claims that deficits "no longer matter"...

"At a certain point we’ll have a Wile E. Coyote moment. For those not familiar with the Road Runner cartoons, Mr. Coyote had a habit of running off cliffs and taking several steps on thin air before noticing that there was nothing underneath his feet. Only then would he plunge.

What will that plunge look like? It will certainly involve a sharp fall in the dollar and a sharp rise in interest rates. In the worst-case scenario, the government’s access to borrowing will be cut off, creating a cash crisis that throws the nation into chaos."


Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:39 | 2382833 Ahmeexnal
Ahmeexnal's picture

In Greece, there is no wealth inequality. Now that wealth transfer is almost complete and Greece has been plundered by the "uber alles" nation, the only thing left in Greece is a pauper equality.


A week before the country holds a general election, charities are distributing meals to people who never imagined they would be in the same situation as the immigrants next to them in the queue, writes PETER MURTAGH in Athens

PIREOS IS A WIDE AVENUE in central Athens, running from Omonia Square southwest to a clutch of pottery museums in the heart of the ancient area known as Keramikos. No 37 is an unprepossessing two-storey stucco building painted in pastel shades of blue and grey. There is nothing much to indicate what goes on inside; from the outside it looks lifeless.

But behind this dull facade, three times a day, are scenes of human misery and sorrow involving people who never expected this to happen to them. Walk around the rear of the building, via the narrow traffic-filled Sofokelous street, and you can peer through the railings of what initially seems like a school playground.

This is where they are fed, the destitute of Athens, the new poor who are bewildered at the state in which they find themselves, and the refugees and asylum seekers, a flotsam of human misery from central Asia that has turned much of this part of the city into what many Athenians call a ghetto, a no-go area they avoid, especially at night.

From about 11.30am on Thursday, about 600 people, most of them middle-aged, begin to shuffle into the sun-dappled courtyard from the surrounding streets for the lunchtime distribution of food. Some look as if they are sleeping rough. Others are managing to hold it together a little better.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:50 | 2382842 flacon
flacon's picture

Does Krugman actually believe himself (in which case he is delusional), or, is he in fact delusional?


I can't figure out which...

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:57 | 2382855 Clueless Economist
Clueless Economist's picture

You are incorrect Mr flacon, I am in fact delusional.

--Professor Paul Krugman

Nobel Prize Winner


Ivy Leaguer


NY Times Writer

All-Around Douchebag

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:08 | 2382872 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

This is live now -

Webster G. Tarpley discusses 9/11 on C-Span:
Sat, 04/28/2012 - 21:00 | 2382919 trembo slice
trembo slice's picture

how funny would it be if this was the real Paul Krugman and he hates himself for selling his soul to TPTB?

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 22:07 | 2382999 disabledvet
disabledvet's picture

well he is a paid member of the commentariat now. i know that's why i'm cranky all the time. "for money i can change my mind."

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 21:03 | 2382921 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture


All-Around Douchebag

Please, Mr. Krugman, your modesty is admirable, but you should give yourself credit where due:

Paul Krugman, Douchebagosaurus Rex


Sat, 04/28/2012 - 21:38 | 2382958 The Alarmist
The Alarmist's picture

Krugman, The bearded face of evil ... pure, naked, smirking evil.

Sun, 04/29/2012 - 04:43 | 2383298 Fish Gone Bad
Fish Gone Bad's picture

Krugman has benefited from all this liquidity so he has a vested interest to keep piling on the money.  Aside from being a shit talker, does he have any skills?  Seriously.

Personally I really really like the idea of going big or go home.  I will agree to any bailout of whatever size he deems necessary this ONE time.  $400 quadrillion?  Bring it on bitch.  $1 quintillion.  Sure.  I will bring the popcorn.  Bring it on, then STFU.  I do not know if the world can wait out the consequences, but I am entertained by seemingly intelligent people thinking they can legislate away the theory of gravity (It is just a theory).

Krugman, soon to be labelled as just another economic criminal.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 22:11 | 2383002 bobert
bobert's picture

I would like interest rates to run free. Find their own level. Act as a pricing mechanism. I hope you are correct and that they begin (are allowed) to rise in the near future.

Sun, 04/29/2012 - 10:35 | 2383542 Nukular Freedum
Nukular Freedum's picture

Broadly agree with this but you should know that a 100% reserve system with no fractional reserve banking is NOT a free-market solution and would lead to medieval rates of growth.
This is not a pedantic point since it goes to the heart of why the Austrians lost the battle for supremacy to the Keynesians, notwithstanding the errors of the latter which are well highlighted by this excellent article.

Sun, 04/29/2012 - 12:37 | 2383661 GoodMorningMr.V...
GoodMorningMr.VanRumpoy...'s picture

Slower, growth yes. But real and stable growth. People might actually be able to invest on the fundamentals, instead of trying to take an educated guess as to which way the insiders have the table tilted.

Sun, 04/29/2012 - 14:36 | 2383781 ArmchairRevolut...
ArmchairRevolutionary's picture

Actually NO.

Growth would continue as measured in value. The fiat rate of growth would slow dramatically, but that would be OK; because the value purchased would increase dramatically and the everyone would not have their pockets picked by the money printers.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 18:50 | 2382784 oddjob
oddjob's picture

William K. Black, currently an Associate Professor of Economics and Law at the University of Missouri-Kansas City

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:09 | 2382810 Jay Gould Esq.
Jay Gould Esq.'s picture

Seriously, Pater -- when, in recorded contemporary history, has Krugman ever "got it ?"


Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:58 | 2382849 Doña K
Doña K's picture

In the late 1990's early 2000's Krugman wrote extensively about Japan. I dug this article I had read at the time.

I am not an Economist, so I ask that someone read them and tell us if he is a Genius or a Charlatan.

Segment below:

Japan's economic malaise is first and foremost a problem for Japan itself. But it also poses problems for others: for troubled Asian economies desperately in need of a locomotive, for Western advocates of free trade whose job is made more difficult by Japanese trade surpluses. Last and surely least - but not negligibly - Japan poses a problem for economists, because this sort of thing isn't supposed to happen. Like most macroeconomists who sometimes step outside the ivory tower, I believe that actual business cycles aren't always real business cycles, that some (most) recessions happen because of a shortfall in aggregate demand. I and most others have tended to assume that such shortfalls can be cured simply by printing more money. Yet Japan now has near-zero short-term interest rates, and the Bank of Japan has lately been expanding its balance sheet at the rate of about 50% per annum - and the economy is still slumping. What's going on?

And the sequel

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:03 | 2382863 knukles
knukles's picture

He is neither Genius nor Charlatan. 

Krugman is to Economics as Cramer is to Investing. 
Lousy intellectual foundation utilized by his employer for entertainment and ratings. 

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 21:07 | 2382926 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture


He is neither Genius nor Charlatan.

He is the pinnacle, the very apogee of mediocrity.


Sat, 04/28/2012 - 23:27 | 2383037 Element
Element's picture

So, when they decide who gets the no-bell prize in eco-nomes, they like flip-a-coin or draw-straws, then the winner draws a name from a hat of known tribalist retards, or something like that?

Sun, 04/29/2012 - 21:58 | 2384172 AnAnomalous
AnAnomalous's picture

He is the pinnacle, the very apogee of mediocrity.

Such is to say, he is typical USA American citizen.

Not like Chinese man usually, who is knowing the follow of orders and central command structure in the instinct of.  Not so with USA citizens, who do thinking more with big swinging penises and not brains of them. 

Brains are hallmark of Chinese citizens.

Brains and Communist Party dictatorship are the why we Chinese future crush the USA big noses, and leave them in the powder.

Sun, 04/29/2012 - 22:15 | 2384199 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture


Brains are hallmark of Chinese citizens.

Ah, ah, and thus the bird of Chinese citizenism attains nirvana. Very roundaboutish, in a Chinese citizenism way sort of being is.

Brains and Communist Party dictatorship are the why we Chinese future crush the USA big noses, and leave them in the powder.

...but not the powder of rhinoceros horn, which Chinese citizenism practice uses for enhancement of penises sized of elevator button and needing strong remedy of much vigorously.


Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:04 | 2382866 Doña K
Doña K's picture

I wonder if these contradict what he is saying nowadays.

I am aslo curious if he lives in an Ivory Tower himself or on Mahogany Row.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:38 | 2382894 DavidC
DavidC's picture

Touché! And spot on!


Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:59 | 2382857 Withdrawn Sanction
Withdrawn Sanction's picture

Can someone give an example of an economist/politician with a beard that can be trusted.

Santa ...?

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:04 | 2382865 knukles
knukles's picture

Nancy Pelosi

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:16 | 2382880 littleguy
littleguy's picture

Touché Sir.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:39 | 2382895 DavidC
DavidC's picture



Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:54 | 2382916 wisefool
wisefool's picture

+1. "I cant repatriat those dollars!"      "You must repatriate those dollars."  "But you dont understand. Its the tax code."

Do I look good in this Shirt?

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 21:40 | 2382960 Harbanger
Harbanger's picture

He said, CAN be trusted.

Here's a Pelosi visual to prevent PE. PE.ncy-Pelosi-With-a-Beard-Pictures-74670.asp

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 22:07 | 2382996 bobert
bobert's picture

This is a surprisingly stupid comment from you.

I stand in defense of bearded economists!

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 23:19 | 2383106 Van Halen
Van Halen's picture

Off with his head!

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:35 | 2382815 Jay Gould Esq.
Jay Gould Esq.'s picture

Well done, Hedgeless Horseman. A line comes to mind, from "The Fountainhead," where Toohey asks Howard Roarke, "What do you think of me, Mr. Roarke ?"

The response -- applicable, frankly, in the context of Krugman...

"But I don't think of you."

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 21:04 | 2382922 johnberesfordti...
johnberesfordtiptonjr's picture

Wow, man... that's just so like POWERFUL.

If only we all could have that wonderful and beautiful lack of caring.

I'm getting misty-eyed just thinking about it.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 21:16 | 2382937 wisefool
wisefool's picture

And with that, I am off to the coast to coast AM archives to see if Krugman has been on there.

I seriously do not want to be in a foxhole with him vs. the Timmahs/reptoids.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:05 | 2382867 vast-dom
vast-dom's picture

stick to religion hedgeless, that's clearly your forté.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 21:56 | 2382984 Pure Evil
Pure Evil's picture

Well, maybe not, anyone can regurgitate what they've read in a book.

When he starts his own religion then we'll consider it.

Sun, 04/29/2012 - 12:27 | 2383649 Temporalist
Temporalist's picture

Keynesian economics and fiat monetary systems are the special and exclusive religions of the elite.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:51 | 2382911 johnberesfordti...
johnberesfordtiptonjr's picture

Ellsworth Toohey indeed.

A man with such a name is an effeminate elitist intellectual snob. No doubt he’s a socialist. Why, his last name alone sounds like someone spitting… as in PTOOEY, for example.

Only people with hard sounding short names like Galt or Rearden, or perhaps “Rand” can truly be self-actualizing heroes. They are free men who follow objective reason.

With this new understanding, I intend to add Krugman’s picture to my “hate wall” along with FDR, Bernanke, and the recently added Warren Buffet.  

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 21:12 | 2382933 Lednbrass
Lednbrass's picture

Do you wake up early to practice stupid or is it just a gift?

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 22:36 | 2383045 nmewn
nmewn's picture

I'm thinkin he's subsidized for it. No one would do it for free knowing what we know now.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 23:15 | 2383093 Element
Element's picture

What is really sick is that Krugman says we should be "throwing everything at this", by which he means mega-printing and colossal deficit expansions ("including the kitchen sink" was one of his pro-printing lines from last year), so that the poor and the middle class (which share a fair amount of overlap) may be spared the ravages of the current small depression becoming a Great Depression.

I'm pretty sure he now has had his Spring 2012 Bernankle chip-implant upgrade, which would explain the garbled to completely insane mock-defense of Federal Reserve's defacto inflationism, as a sort of commandeering of national economic policy, and what has to now passed as US fiscal forward-planning.

It should be very clear to all by now that Paul Krugman is nothing more and also nothing less than a hired FED SHILL.  

He's the guy Elders Greenspan and Bernanke wanted out there to provide just this sort of 'respectable' cover for the FED/TBTF Coup's PR facade, as it emerged from cover, after so many decades of pretending to be harmless and NET beneficial.



Sun, 04/29/2012 - 20:28 | 2384100 dougngen
dougngen's picture


Sat, 04/28/2012 - 21:51 | 2382979 lamont cranston
lamont cranston's picture

Whate the hell. Gary Cooper/Howard Roark still wonked Patricia O'Neal/Miss Rincon. And Paul Newman didn't in Hud. God, was she hot in Hud, back when that was a man's nickname.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 22:54 | 2383070 midtowng
midtowng's picture

Those that think that wealth inequality is not important have learned nothing from history.

First of all, wealth inequality is corrosive to the markets because those with an overabudance of wealth always tend to try to protect it by twisting the political and economic system in their direction.

Secondly, it is corrosive to democracy because those with wealth can buy power. (see the first point)

Anyone who thinks that wealth inequality doesn't matter has been sold dogma and ignores reality.

Sun, 04/29/2012 - 12:59 | 2383685 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Who cares as long as the fruits brought by the free market are shared by all?

It is very easy to achieve actually the US citizen way: you simply do not account for people who do not have an access to the fruits and you are left with people who have access.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 17:50 | 2382714 Seorse Gorog fr...
Seorse Gorog from that Quantum Entanglement Fund. alright_.-'s picture

Well, what do you expect from an Ewok?



Sat, 04/28/2012 - 18:30 | 2382766 Belarusian Bull
Belarusian Bull's picture

LOL. Thank you.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:12 | 2382812 narapoiddyslexia
narapoiddyslexia's picture

That Ewok threw my 89-year old Mother under the bus. I tried to leave a polite comment to that effect under his article on the NYT web site (yes, I pay the NYT) and he wouldn't let it post. He can go to hell.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:25 | 2382878 knukles
knukles's picture

I had a similar experience with a comment sent to the Economist reflecting upon Ted Kennedy after thier article(s) lionizing the man as a standard bearer of freedom, democracy, equality, etc., etc., ad nauseum, horseshit and pabulum.
I pointed out that had it not been for his two assassinanted brothers, he'd of probably been relegated to the lower reaches of drunken obnoxious priviliged ineffective politicians in the grand design of Wilbur Mills splashing about in a fountain amusing one of his hussies.
Albeit, it was extremely sensitive, respectful and polite couple of paragraphs that I submitted. 
It was printed on the web, as were many more of a similar ilk from the US readership.
Several hours later I got an e-mail stating that if I ever pulled a fucking stunt like that again, villifying, defaming, etc., somebody, breaking every single rule of civility and appropriateness (none of which were done, swearing, cursing, defimation etc., not a single one as I'd taken pains to not offend) that they'd pull my commenting rights.
Not only that, they'd removed my comment critical of the man as well as every single other not of high praise and adulation.
So I let my subscription expire.
Fuck them and the Illuminatti NWO program they profess not to profess.
Nothing but censorship, directed history, Propaganda and fabrications.

What a buncha Cocksuckers.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 22:21 | 2383014 bobert
bobert's picture


Sat, 04/28/2012 - 22:47 | 2383060 nmewn
nmewn's picture

Double up yo.

At what point in time was it mandated that all brothers & sisters shared the same values and thoughts? Papa Joe (a known bootlegger, nazis sympathizer and short seller) had offspring.

Yet, it is presumed they were all the salt of the earth types...Camelot is a fairy tale, but someone was Mordred in the tale.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 23:32 | 2383117 hedgeless_horseman
hedgeless_horseman's picture





But really...duh.  Look who the advertisers are for The Economist.  It is a Whose Who of TBTF.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:20 | 2382883 Miffed Microbio...
Miffed Microbiologist's picture

I don't know about that. Ewoks are kind of cute. Krugman looks like a young "cleaned up" Charles Manson to me. Just stick a swastika between those eyes to complete the look.


Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:43 | 2382901 knukles
knukles's picture

Look closely at his eyes.
Solid black.

He's fucking proof positive that there are Reptilian Alien Malfactors Plotting the Downfall of Mankind Amongst Us.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 22:22 | 2383020 bobert
bobert's picture

Ya howdy again.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 17:52 | 2382718 PaperBear
PaperBear's picture

These guys self-satire.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 17:52 | 2382720 moskov
moskov's picture

He is a piece of shit. Who cares if he gets it.

Sun, 04/29/2012 - 12:35 | 2383657 Temporalist
Temporalist's picture

Readers here only "care" insomuch that he's influencing masses of sociopath sycophants that will continue to spread his diseased manure via mass media and educational institutions.

What's worse is that his writing and theories could easily be replaced by MillionDollarBonus_ and nobody would notice.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 17:55 | 2382721 Pretorian
Pretorian's picture

He sold his sweet ass to 1% long time ago for a nobel 1 penis. Now he have to stand and defend them from russian type revolution.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 18:51 | 2382785 New World Chaos
New World Chaos's picture

<--- Krugman really is this stupid/delusional.

<--- The puppetmasters have serious dirt on him.  Ideas?


Sat, 04/28/2012 - 21:09 | 2382929 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture


He sold his sweet ass to 1% long time ago for a nobel 1 penis.

He's a butthole laureate.


Sat, 04/28/2012 - 17:56 | 2382727 dcb
dcb's picture

I send massive data to the nytimes from many pundits against krugman's thoughts. have snt so mny articles on this subject alone it is astounding. I deecided that with this one, just like the bank krugman is a pathological liar, or such a concrete idealog he just can't adjust his policies. One thing I know for certain is that he in no way understand how banks operate in the united states any more. While. the banks are trading operations, and by banks we mean wall street, derivative trades, etc. actually lending is only  avery small portion of their business. Krugman just ignores this. In fact it's im0proper to call the big banks banks any mnore. they are trading houses.


Krugman also ignore that they get paid on asset prices, that also determines their solvency and pay. all f which is helped by zirp.

It of corse also ignores how each time the market dips tthe bankers call for more qe. I found it funny that he really bastardized himself with this/

if you follow this link to the paradigm lost section, there are multiple lectures on inequality fromthe berlin conference  of the institute of new economic thnking, also multiple on building a socially useful financial system (i think the benzemer lecture here is very good), and financial instability. really must watches for all

for ther record each economist in this lecture serices presents evidence on how wrong krugman is in the above

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 18:22 | 2382761 BlankfeinDiamond
BlankfeinDiamond's picture

Good grammar, dcb.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:15 | 2382816 narapoiddyslexia
narapoiddyslexia's picture

Maybee hee ist de forriner. Kut heem sum slak.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:31 | 2382829 dcb
dcb's picture

ir dyslexia, or no spell check, or typing in the dark. but he doesn't understand english. my grammer was OK, it's the spelling that isn't

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 22:26 | 2383027 bobert
bobert's picture

Use your fingers in addition to your thumbs.

Practice makes perfect.

Sun, 04/29/2012 - 07:18 | 2383395 BlankfeinDiamond
BlankfeinDiamond's picture


Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:29 | 2382825 dcb
dcb's picture

The European: So let’s take a longer view. Do you think that the crisis will have an effect on future generations of economists and policy-makers, for example by changing the way that economic basics are taught?
Stiglitz: I think that change is really occurring with the young people. My young students overwhelmingly don’t understand how people could have believed in the old models. That is good. But on the other hand, many of them say that if you want to be an economist, you still have to deal with all the old guys who believe in their wrong theories, who teach those theories, and expect you to believe in them as well. So they choose not to go into those branches of economics. But where I have been even more disappointed is American policy-making. Ben Bernanke gives a speech and says something like, there was nothing wrong with economic theory, the problems were a few details in implementation. In fact, there was a lot wrong with economic theory and with the basic policy framework that was derived from theory. If your mindset is that nothing was wrong, you will not demand new models. That’s a big disappointment.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 22:27 | 2383031 bobert
bobert's picture

Much better!

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 18:23 | 2382728 Belarusian Bull
Belarusian Bull's picture

MillionDollarBonus is surely Krugman.


Sat, 04/28/2012 - 21:15 | 2382936 Lednbrass
Lednbrass's picture

At least MDB knows he is joking, Krugman is genuinely serious.

Or genuinely psychotic, its a coin toss.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 18:02 | 2382731 Vegetius
Vegetius's picture

The corridors of power here in Europe are full of people high on Self-delusion and greed.  You cannot (or can) blame people for defending their pensions or wages by using Krugman Defence or any other rubbish. They know it’s all lies, but here’s the thing “They Don’t Care” The only thing these Guys care about is walking with as much loot as they can stuff in their pockets.

Fun while it lasts I suppose and that’s the big question “How Long Will It Last”

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 18:07 | 2382738 Corn1945
Corn1945's picture

Call Krugman and the Fed what they really are---> Financial Terrorists

Terrorists that are far more dangerous than some guy with an AK-47 halfway around the world. 

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 18:19 | 2382760 Everybodys All ...
Everybodys All American's picture

The other thing about this whole Fed driven economy is that the average person does not have the access to their agenda. Banks certainly do but the average Joe has no chance of competing in this game. You talk about trading on inside information. Bernanke has pretty much signaled he will give all that and more to bankers.  There can be no bigger inside information trade then knowing what Fed policy will be before everyone else knows. The Fed has lately at least under Bernanke turned in to a wink wink nod nod player for bankers.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:12 | 2382876 razorthin
razorthin's picture

The problem with this Fed driven economy is that the average person's eyes glaze over when you try to explain the lunacy of it.  That's why it is so maddening being me.  No, I am the lunatic.  Wow.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 21:18 | 2382940 Lednbrass
Lednbrass's picture

Just look at the comments below Krugmans column, several "Occupy" types there are going on about the WSJ pandering to the 1%, then thanking Krugman for his defense of the 99%.

Its absolutely breathtaking stupidity, and what is worse they are allowed to vote.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 22:07 | 2382998 nmewn
nmewn's picture

It is/was breathtaking to watch.

I mean really, multi-millionaire Michael Moore and every "stimulus enabled" tenured professor and pol with no honor and guilt to assuage doing "tent city" before heading back air their conditioned comfort and drinks on the veranda.

Really mind boggling.

But it does seem the "print parade" has rounded the corner and the music is fading...

"Portuguese Finance Minister Admits Stimulus Failed"

Oh noes and no shit.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 23:29 | 2383114 bobert
bobert's picture

How long....

That is the question MN.

How long can it keep going?

Oh how I long for free and fair markets.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 22:37 | 2383047 bobert
bobert's picture

Being on an IPO list, dealing in distressed assets, and having inside information is truly an advantage.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 18:27 | 2382764 Seasmoke
Seasmoke's picture

Don't ever trust anyone who got a Nobel they did not deserve

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 18:30 | 2382765 LetThemEatRand
LetThemEatRand's picture

Krugman is a douche, but I don't think you can have a real discussion about wealth inequality rising over the last few decades without addressing globalism and "free" trade with countries that have no labor or environment laws.   

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 18:38 | 2382770 ebworthen
ebworthen's picture

Krugman - the potato with a beard; waxy limpid pools for eyes that some mistake for intelligence versus delusion, a cycloptic mind, emotion disguised as thought.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 18:53 | 2382788 paso24
paso24's picture

The potato with a beard! Love it!

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 21:17 | 2382938 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

ebworthen said:

Krugman - the potato with a beard; waxy limpid pools for eyes that some mistake for intelligence versus delusion, a cycloptic mind, emotion disguised as thought.

That is a beautiful, accurate, well written summation. I can add but one small contribution:

Krugman - whose dual-purpose beard acts as a drool bib and camoflages his gills.


Sat, 04/28/2012 - 22:40 | 2383050 bobert
bobert's picture

I'm liking all of the comments about Krugman accept dislike for his beard.

Give it a break you hairless fags.

Sun, 04/29/2012 - 09:43 | 2383499 aheady
aheady's picture


Sun, 04/29/2012 - 01:17 | 2382773 Hedgetard55
Hedgetard55's picture

Shit for brains Krugman really believes his bullshit.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 18:45 | 2382776 Eric L. Prentis
Eric L. Prentis's picture

The delusional, ignorant, naïve and raving stealth neocon Paul Krugman—needs an intervention.


Please remove all sharp objects from Paul’s possession, or he may hurt himself.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 18:52 | 2382789 Chump
Chump's picture

No, give him more sharp objects.  Pretty shiny ones.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 21:20 | 2382942 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

...scalpel blades, buffed to a dazzling, mirror-like lustre.


Sat, 04/28/2012 - 18:48 | 2382779 death_to_fed_tyranny
death_to_fed_tyranny's picture


Sat, 04/28/2012 - 18:48 | 2382780 ZeroPoint
ZeroPoint's picture

Krugman thinks the only difference between rich and poor is that rich people did 'smart' things to aquire theirs. When in reality, most rich people won the womb lottery.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 18:49 | 2382783 Justaman
Justaman's picture

What would we do without PK?  He is single handedly keeping the UFO discussion alive!!!!

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 18:52 | 2382786 Caviar Emptor
Caviar Emptor's picture

Welcome to The Stable-But-Shitty Economy. 

Krugman, like so many on WS are happy with it. It means they get to keep their power and their jobs. They think it means that a frightened middle class will be cowed into accepting this as the new reality combined with the implicit threat that it could be turned into something worse. 

Translated, saving the banks, WS and the political power behind them was achieved. Mission accomplished. And the plan for the rest is to accelerate the process which led to this to begin with: more credit, more money printing, more offshoring of jobs and industry and wage-stagnation to keep inflation moderate through loss of buying power. 

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:01 | 2382796 Chump
Chump's picture

The really shitty part is that Krugman will always be able to say he was "right."  Tepid "recovery?"  Well duh, we should've listened to him and printed even more astronomical amounts of dollars.  Cut deficit spending and debt monetization, and we get to listen to that asshole say "told ya so" after the economy necessarily contracts.  The average person doesn't have the mental acuity to call him on his bullshit, so he just gets to keep spewing it.  Piece of trash.  I truly hope he's bought into his own insanity and has no PMs, no stored food, nothing but fiat.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:12 | 2382813 rsnoble
rsnoble's picture

Greetings Earthlings, nano nano!!

Drinking a few(lot) beers, grilling porterhouses in awhile. Just checking in long enough to say FUCK THE US GOV'T!!! And EAT SHIT FUCK OFF AND DIE TO ALL US POLITICIANS THAT SO GRACIOUSLY SOLD OUR FUCKING ASSES DOWN THE DIRTY RIVER!!!

You're going to FINALLY get what's coming to your smelly asses you cum belching whores!!

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:17 | 2382818 Waterfallsparkles
Waterfallsparkles's picture

I would love to see an hour debate between Rick Santelli and Paul Krugman.

That would be an epic battle.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:40 | 2382897 disabledvet
disabledvet's picture

Krug's a little on the hyper side. Still I can't fault the NY Times's absolutely true. The banks are getting gutted in here now. This is a traders DELIGHT. If I can make a market in Amazon I'm making a fortune...and I'm the one the banks are afraid of since I am the one creating risk. Having said that "I doubt this the plan." equity traders are the "test pilots of finance." the only thing they know is "that other guy will die." hopefully that's true! A "simple and solid economic recovery" is all I ask. PHUCK the abstract b.s.!

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 21:35 | 2382954 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture


I would love to see an hour debate between Rick Santelli and Paul Krugman.

I would love to see Paul Krugman blow on a shark whistle and then attempt to debate a Lake Tardicaca Shark.


Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:22 | 2382821 donis
donis's picture

Krugman is the Ellsworth M. Toohey of our time.  if you don't beleive me, just google image search "Ellsworth M. Toohey"

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:28 | 2382823 OverTheUnder
OverTheUnder's picture

Krugman reminds me of a broken tv........sound but no picture...

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:28 | 2382824 Waterfallsparkles
Waterfallsparkles's picture

It is so easy to live with blinders on when you are associated with the 1%.  How could he or any of those people really know the devastating effect of Bernanke's policy unless the were living the life of a blue collarworker that was laid off from their Job or a retired individual trying to live on a small amount of savings and Social Security?

I would like to see real life experment where Krugman was forced to try to feed and keep a roof over the head of his family living as a blue collar worker on unemployment benifits for a year.

I wonder if his views would change?

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 21:21 | 2382943 nmewn
nmewn's picture

I can't guarantee he would change.

Faced with stagnant wages and ever increasing "prices" (the monetary inflation "solution" he always espouses) would leave him a ward of the state.

Just as he is now ;-)

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 21:10 | 2382827 SeanJKerrigan
SeanJKerrigan's picture

Krugman recently said we wont be like Greece because we have a printing press. Forget just for a second what the consequences would be if we attempted to print our way out of the debt. His bigger and more immediate falacy is that the power elite WANT us to be like Greece.  This never enters his mind.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:11 | 2382828 vast-dom
vast-dom's picture

Between Krugman and Obummer the Nobel prize isn't worth wiping your ass with!


Pernicious clowns....

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:33 | 2382830 OverTheUnder
OverTheUnder's picture

He's got that Nancy Pelosi look in his eyes.....

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:34 | 2382831 GernB
GernB's picture

I;'ve seen Krugman publish opinion pieces in the NYT where the central argument rests the consumer price index, while he has a published acedemic paper claiming the consumer price index underestimates inflation. If you believe that how can you use it to justify your opinion in a NYT article? He is clearly an idealog and is either functionally impared and so does not know he has contradicted himself or he is lying and believes it is justified because the end jusitifes any lie. (never mind that it means your ideology is founded on lies). This article is more of the same. He is smart enough to know that his opponents point was not the price of the assets but that the money goes to banks first, and the the owners of the banks are far more likely to benefit from that money than the depositors. But instead he picks on a statement that wasn't even central to the argument. Krugman tipfiess what is wrong with political discourse in this country, he is more interested in winning the argument that in providing an accurate view of what is happening. And so he spews misinformation and misleading statements backed up by misleading data and the NYT readers lap it up and think their views have been vindicated, when all that has happened is they have been made fools of by believing a string of lies.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:17 | 2382869 earleflorida
earleflorida's picture

why give bernake all the credit. let's spread the manure around. afterall, it was greenspan that took the credit for all of 'Tall Paul's' hard, and laborious work. these guys [greenspan/ bernake] look at decades rather than years,... and their masters' plan's are well defined? let's have a look back upon 'TIP's', shall we. now remember, people like krugman were awarded this 'POS' [propaganda grandiose] nobel's economic prize [1969 created just a few years before the 'Nixon Shock, surprised?] for a reason.

ref:   * [click sidebar -"Tips / CPI Data"] Ps. sorry about link :(       Note the evolution ie. time preference

ZIRP hurts? just ask alan, who by the way admired Ayn Rand!    **[april/1994 ___ 'greenspan's new inflation vigilance'] ___ scroll down to sections "Greenspan's baby steps" & "A chill at the FOMC meetings"] ,interesting stuff that krugman should regurgitate. Ps2. sorry about link... just click on 'oops' and your there :-(

excellent read


Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:57 | 2382917 disabledvet
disabledvet's picture

"problem of history." are we Japan? If the answer is yes then Bernanke has done the right thing. Interest rates have responded in a "Japanese like way" plunging in a way that makes the Austerians happy. Having said that "it doesn't work in Europe" would be a mistake to say it's the right thing to do here. Currently certain pundits are calling for the Fed itself to engage in fiscal policy. I did take note that the Chairman had no problem coming out against the Bush tax cuts expiring...a direct attack on the President's views I might add.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 22:46 | 2383057 bobert
bobert's picture

Try using paragraphs.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:40 | 2382834 bobola
bobola's picture

Krugman, like Bernanke, is stuck on the simple idea that by keeping failed banks operational with billions in cheap new money will keep us from sliding into another great depression.

They are very aware of the fact that the fed caused the 1929 depression by choking of the money supply, which allowed a basic recession to spiral downward into a decade long worldwide depression.

The problem with Krugman is that he seems to ignore the massive amounts of new debt being created.

As Japan gets squeezed further and further into a corner by spending ever greater amounts of money servicing ever greater new debt, eventually Krugman will have to face the reality he is wrong.

His winning the Nobel prize is a complete fraud.



Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:45 | 2382839 OverTheUnder
OverTheUnder's picture

People like Krugman never face reality and NEVER admit they were wrong...

Sun, 04/29/2012 - 11:58 | 2383619 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

For what it's worth, it's not like there's a fallback plan for the big banks to fail.  I'm in complete agreement that the Fed and the government are doing all the wrong things, but it's not for no reason that they've been unwilling to kill the banks.

People are pissed that they're getting poorer.  Imagine how pissed people would be if they couldn't access "their" money in the banks.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:43 | 2382835 OverTheUnder
OverTheUnder's picture

Look at the negatives that just showed up...libtard troll alert!

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:45 | 2382838 Chump
Chump's picture

Lol I think Krugman just found this article.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:17 | 2382847 vast-dom
vast-dom's picture

..."so that future goods would be considered to be worth more than present goods at the moment."


Actually, with ZIRP + CNTL+P = Krugman is unwittingly correct on this one his only valid point!


Then he states the most insane shit ever:




Furthermore, Fed efforts to do this probably tend on average to hurt, not help, bankers. Banks are largely in the business of borrowing short and lending long; anything that compresses the spread between short rates and long rates is likely to be bad for their profits. And the things the Fed is trying to do are in fact largely about compressing that spread, either by persuading investors that it will keep short rates at zero for a longer time or by going out and buying long-term assets. These are actions you would expect to make bankers angry, not happy — and that’s what has actually happened.”


I just can't believe Krugman can be this clueless and retarded; therefore, he must be PURELY EVIL to write such diametrically opposed to reality dribble for his sheeple readership!


Krugman's above quote is only valid if one were to believe that bankers do not like money....


I really can't believe Krugman writes the shit he does -- it's truly mind-boggling how anyone can be so wrong, yet have cash and prizes and such! or maybe that's what it takes these days: to be so egregiously wrong that you for a moment change the fabric of time and space until you realize that you actually didn't change anything because there is a massive economic crash and then you.........i feel sick.....


Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:55 | 2382852 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

You can take the time to study economics (especially austrian)  and all the rhetoric is resolved. However, to expect the general public to educate themselves, you will be seriously disappointed.

Consequently, just as the critique of Krugman is presented clearly and makes all the sense in the world, only a few will realize this.

Be thankful for your bliss, in knowing you understand the questions, that you cannot be dissuaded from your position and that you play the markets accordingly.

There has always been a krugman, greenspan, volker, strong, morgenthal, keynes and any number of other academics that have done the work of the elites. It is still possible to structure your life to negate their influences. Fuck 'em. 

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 22:51 | 2383066 bobert
bobert's picture

"play the markets"

Well said sir!

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 19:56 | 2382853 vast-dom
vast-dom's picture

So the Nobel today is awared for OPINION (pieces). Wow! Everyone should have one!

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 21:23 | 2382854 Element
Element's picture

When your 'economy's' GDP-bubble is based-on misallocation of credit, and also on the increasing public taxation funding of subsequently unaffordable and non-productive activities and expenditures of Govt, then when you do finally cut this so-called 'deficit', due to financial necessity, you get GDP-BUBBLE POP, the so-called 'recession', but it is not even a real "business-cycle" recession. Thus the people who make nothing become unemployed first (except if they are in Govt of course) ... then the productive ones do as well, as aggregate demand continues to wane.

The question is; is the balancing, redirecting and re-prioritising of your former thoroughly misallocated budget expenditures, in fact an actual implementation of a national "Austerity" policy?

I would say that it most certainly isn't 'austerity' - actual austerity is not that.

What they are calling 'austerity' is merely the rediscovery of the absolute necessity for budget prudence.

Budgets do, have and always will matter, no matter what the MMT printing fans say, because when the Govt doesn't budget or spend tax revenues wisely, THEN THE HOUSEHOLD BUDGET ALWAYS GETS FUCKED-OVER INDIRECTLY INSTEAD!

Governments and Banks create this fake 'austerity' and high taxation via not budgeting, and we allow them to do it because we won't face the fact that these lying and unproductive NET parasites don't know and don't care how the money they rush to spend is being generated (if you just don't print and debase the purchasing-power, wages and s[l]avings of the proles.

Someone always pays when budgeting prudence disappears, and it is NEVER the predatory parasites, they'll only inform you that we are all in this together, and that we must all bear the burden of hard times, that they knowingly created, and are still making worse every time they hit 'PRINT' to deny the fact they have bled the country into national bankruptcy.

So this so-called 'deficit-cutting' will naturally lead to a deep and protracted recession and unemployment in the former anomalous credit-based GDP-BUBBLES, for that is what these bloated so-called 'economies' really are, and this GDP-bubble was only the result of deficit-spending plus private misallocation of unnecessary and wonton encouragement of a gush of economically destructive exploitative lending.

In the final analysis this was all driven by rapacious bank 'lending', driven by criminally excessive levels of advertising.

And let's be honest about ADVERTISING; advertising is 100% propaganda, a dedicated targeted destructive psychological-attack upon the population, especially of the young and the psychologically weak and vulnerable (which is why advertising firms utilise the services of so many psychologists), that is solely designed to get people to destructively buy items they don't need, to fleece them, and enslave them, whilst using the credit they obtain to do this, from banks, to inflate and debase their wage, their purchasing-power and discourage saving any money they would dare to commit to a s[l]avings account, at a bank, that could be used in actual productive investments.

The GOVERNEMENT approves of, and actively encourages that process of the aspiring duped debt junkie.

Look at what predators do in the wild, they target the young, the unwell, and the injured.  And that's what predatory advertisers do as well, on the behalf of the credit-pushers, who create the GDP-bubbles, that Governments endlessly love to encourage.

And if you are psychologically fit, rational and clear of mind, they also actively seek to attempt to undermine any healthy mind, in order to make you vulnerable to their nonsense.

So they use insane TV programs, then lace them with mentally poisonous commercials.

So we make the buying 'decisions' that we have been thus mentally prepped to make. 

We are hardly free and independent agents in this insidious process.

The young are trained in advance to be unaware, flip, short-sighted fools, and by the time they wise up, it's generally too late, they are already debt-slaves, caught-up in the states taxation swindle, and they find that the HOUSEHOLD BUDGET is now completely porked, and they are either a wage-slave, or else an unemployed desperado seeking a fortnightly personal tax-payer 'bailout' ... which comes from printing up another deficit.

Thus this financialism menace goes around and around, in ever-decreasing circles, until it disappears up its own fiat-shitting arsehole.

And we are left in economic ruins, in poverty, often resulting in a famine, and always resulting in major wars, which provides the cover for the Govt to portray itself as the hero of the moment, our saviour at large, as it sends us to be slaughtered in vast numbers.


Government enables, generates and encourages that whole process, because the government itself is an amalgam of unproductive predatory parasites, that pretend to be good-guys, as they use our tax money to create dedicated propaganda and a psychological assault, termed "Govt advertising", to try and keep us from realising such facts, whilst they coopt all to bled us into social and political submission, and eventually to our personal and national  destruction.


Debt downgrade

Credit ratings agency Standard and Poor's has downgraded Spain's rating by two notches from A to BBB+, warning the country might have to take on more debt to support its banking sector.

Tobias Blattner, the director of economic research at Daiwa Capital Markets, says the outlook for the Spanish economy is "exceptionally gloomy".

"It's not only GDP is likely to fall by possibly more than 2 percentage points. Because of the concerns that we have on the banking sector, house prices have not fallen by a lot, from the peak, only by 22 per cent," he said.

"So I think there's still a lot of room for house prices to fall further and that will obviously cause another big hole in the balance sheets of Spanish banks."

He says Spain may well be forced to accept a multibillion euro rescue package from Brussels.

"I think the concerns are mostly on the growth side, so I think if the real economy was to contact even faster than I think the markets are expending then this might push the yields of Spanish bonds even higher," he said.

"In that case if we reach a critical level of say 7 per cent or even slightly higher than 7 per cent, in that case it is very difficult to see how Spain can maintain market access and in that case it is very likely that later, towards the end of the year, Spain might be pushed into a EU/IMF program."



"Forced to accept" and "pushed into" huh? ... a "euro rescue package" ... from Brussels huh? ... and where does "Brussels" get it from then? ... Mars perhaps?

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 22:58 | 2383075 bobert
bobert's picture

Tell me more.......

Not really, did enjoy your thought process though.

Sun, 04/29/2012 - 08:17 | 2383431 doggings
doggings's picture

and where does "Brussels" get it from then? ... Mars perhaps?

not Mars specifically

Sun, 04/29/2012 - 13:32 | 2383718 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Misallocation of resources? What is that?

Knowing that the US of A is the mecca of US citizenism, and that the current state of the world is the result of US citizenism, was it misallocation of resources or not?

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:01 | 2382859 Alcoholic Nativ...
Alcoholic Native American's picture

There is massive wealth distribution going on alright, it's called taxes.  STEALING AT GUNPOINT BY GOVERNMENT THUGS.


How am I supposed to invest in lucrative business that CREATE HIGH PAYING JOBS if I got uncle sam sticking me up for for crack money every 2 weeks?






Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:04 | 2382864 vast-dom
vast-dom's picture

You are correct.


And meanwhile Apple rightly so pays very little taxes as per NYTimes article i pasted earlier today. For this Apple should be commended, I guess, at the expense of the poor schlub that has to pay taxes and buy one less iGadget....

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:18 | 2382879 Caviar Emptor
Caviar Emptor's picture

You don't get it. They don't want creation of high paying jobs. That's going anywhere but here They want low paying jobs so that the elite can keep their status and have a very docile workforce available at low pay so that they may enjoy their wealth. The rich of the world will maintain presence and enjoy the shopping. But take heart: there will be a brisk demand for butlers and chauffeurs, valets and stable boys, knaves, page boys and gardners. But always keep on your best behavior and watch out for those other servants trying to take your job.  

Sun, 04/29/2012 - 13:29 | 2383712 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Who is those they?

The current crisis is a middle class thing. It goes through aggregate demand.

Poor, well, low on demand.

Rich, high demand but no match for US citizen middle class demand.

Low paying jobs? They were a US citizen middle class first of all.

You dont reach corporation status by satisfying upper class demand, not enough superficy.

You grow into the super mega corporation status by satisfying the middle class.

Middle class were the first to support the shippment of 'lower class' jobs because it suited them.

No determinism in being placed into the middle. But one has to admit that being in the middle, US citizen middle class agree with anything done on the lower class as it benefits them while rejecting the same methods on them.

No principle.When done on others, good. When done on middle class, bad.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:03 | 2382862 Miss Expectations
Miss Expectations's picture

Thanks be to Pater Tenebrarum for doing what had to be done, and doing it with flair.  I especially like the image of Krugman on a perch at the NYT.  Part of me suspects that Krugman wrote this on a dare from Timmay at some dinner with Lloyd Blankfein.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:12 | 2382875 nmewn
nmewn's picture

"Self-appointed 'liberal conscience' guardian Paul Krugman: now he's suddenly springing to the defense of the financial elite and the '1%' in his misguided mission to defend central economic planning."

I don't know about suddenly...but yes, he has always been a statist monetarist/crony capitalist. Otherwise known as one of the plantation overseers.

Even as the fire spreads from the out buildings to the main house, he clings to it...quite remarkable really.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:22 | 2382885 Caviar Emptor
Caviar Emptor's picture

He is indistinguishable from all  the others who stand in opposition to The Great Reset. That makes him indistinguishable from the Wall Street elite, bankers, statists, Cheney and Buffet. 

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:50 | 2382909 nmewn
nmewn's picture


If there was ever a man who epitomized an economic pyromaniac, its Krugman.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 21:06 | 2382925 Caviar Emptor
Caviar Emptor's picture

@nmewn: Pyromaniac. love it. He's a flaming something

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 21:46 | 2382965 nmewn
nmewn's picture

He's a "flaming progressive"...I have no problem saying it ;-)

A "progressive" is a very different animal from a liberal.

A "progressive" will hide behind the moniker of being a liberal to meet his ends...which is socialism. There is nothing liberal about having government intruding into peoples lives...its the opposite...liberals (classical liberals) are very much "conservative" in that respect.

Progessives & socialists are the bane of our existence as humans. Its an affront, an assault on the individual at its core.

They tell me I can't say this or say this or that...not go here or there on my timeline...feel this not that way...ROTFL!!!...they're complete idiots caught up in some weird ego trip of their own making and I'm growing more fond of pointing it out.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 23:02 | 2383083 bobert
bobert's picture

I for one am glad that you did "point it out" MN.

Always enjoy reading your comments! The less obscure the better.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 23:11 | 2383096 nmewn
nmewn's picture

I'm trying to be less coy. The time for juxtaposition & contemplation is past.

I will be free one way or the other anyways ;-)

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 23:37 | 2383124 bobert
bobert's picture

Life has it's risks.

It's hard to stay quiet inspite of this.

Perhaps we design a form of subtle humor, and honesty to deal with this and cal it Z Hedge.

Take care man.

I'm on MST and signing off.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 23:38 | 2383126 bobert
bobert's picture

Life has it's risks.

It's hard to stay quiet inspite of this.

Perhaps we design a form of subtle humor, and honesty to deal with this and cal it Z Hedge.

Take care man.

I'm on MST and signing off.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 23:47 | 2383137 LetThemEatRand
LetThemEatRand's picture

Free of any claim of placing intellectual values over ideological ones?  ^^|^

Sun, 04/29/2012 - 07:43 | 2383408 nmewn
nmewn's picture

Tell ya what, when Krugman puts his own money where his mouth is (instead of constantly advocating the risking of everyone elses), I'll consider it ;-)

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:22 | 2382884 q99x2
q99x2's picture

No No No Although free markets are the end result first we get the biggest baddest banksters. We arrest them. Hand-cuff them. Get them to confess to their crimes. Throw them into jails and re-distribute their stolen wealth into an open source monetary system. It's like everyone sort of hits the lottery when the new system re-boots. Then its a gold rush into the future as humanity is once again run by the human race.

Banksters, crooked politicians, crooked lawyers and treasonous vermon of all sorts are left in prison with Bernie and Rockefeller this and that as their bunkies. Drugs are legallized as well so there will be no crooked attorney generals drug running.

And the best part is that I get to go fishing with my dog. I've had enough wives gonna get  a dog this time.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:31 | 2382891 NidStyles
NidStyles's picture

I have some triple braid here that he can have.

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:45 | 2382904 Hannibal
Hannibal's picture

It's the powers that be that are fucking "Orwellian" shit head Krugman!

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 20:53 | 2382913 I am on to you
I am on to you's picture

Its a funny story!

How come,with so big minds,it can go so utterly bad?

There can only be a fewexplenations,fraud corruption,or,ego,s so big that this planet dont have room for these kinds!


I remember one,out of the economical world,that made me spin,it was when Metalica,i think it was Lars the lame Dane( iam Danish)said,The  E Minor was theirs and had almost exclusive  exclusive right,i thought yes,thats all there is in your Music,E minor!

This is how i look at the economy,there is only one reason to this sick world,at it was mensioned in the beging of the material above,the word ENVY!

The word tells its own story,Envy,envy is someone haveing more than others,and others want what someone have,so if every one,had the same ?ENVY wouldnt even excist,and this will be the chock Therapi,watch out,every body have to have Equlibrium,the same,wouldnt the world be a wonderfull place to live in,no Envy of your fellow human,no reasons for war,no reason to have a car,the size of an mansion,just a box with four wheels,no bank frauds no corrupted politicians no mafia,but most significant:

NO ENVY,some will cal his Utopia,so be it,Utopia it is,but seems far more advanced than the Einstiens that cant even tie their own shoes,and less more can save the human race,due to Envy.


Even Krugman envys somebody.who dont jave his wiew on economy,and other envy him,so where does it end,or even begin,this fenonomen.

Cause envy dont know social boundrys,The rich guy envy the poor guys wife,cause she looks natural,his dosnt,its siliconed Botoxed spantexed,and it looks Ugly in the morning and use Hours and hours to get it set right,he even envy the closeness of the poor family,cause he aint got closeness,he has to buy it:So is it Utopia,to want everyone to have the same,or is Envy?


I know in the Academical economical world,this will be considered a crime even to have this idea,but,ill risk it all,like Goldman or Corcine or the Morgans Barclays or what or whom ever they are,and no matter what name the Economic mind set or Business school is called.

History showed it dont work,and i dont want to go deep in to ,why,besides say,Africa Australia,North South America,and say,Europeans,need to say MORE??

No offens to anybody, i know it goes widely around this planet,the European plauge!

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 21:56 | 2382982 Cabreado
Cabreado's picture


(But with the small exception that I think you're really talking about humility, the lack thereof, and the "European plague" is not quite right -- that part is a history/logistics/opportunity thing)


Sun, 04/29/2012 - 07:20 | 2383396 I am on to you
I am on to you's picture

Could might humility!

But i dont consider,war a logistical oppotunity,its simply murder for wealth.


The lack of humility,i give was shown at the Bharain formula 1 death show!

Sat, 04/28/2012 - 21:12 | 2382932 Cabreado
Cabreado's picture

The pathologically Self-Absorbed can arrive at all sorts of positions in their life/"career."

Once they arrive at a place that offers free sustenance, as in Narcissistic Supply, they will say and do anything to protect it.

Truth has nothing to do with any of it; in fact it is their nemesis.

We have failed, We are failing, We will continue to fail 'til...

all because of a simple dynamic of a critical mass of those-who-achieve-influence do not give a shit, as they lack the wherewithal to do so.


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