This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Paul vs Paul: Round 2

Tyler Durden's picture


Submitted by Azizonomics

Paul vs Paul: Round 2

Bloomberg viewers estimate that Ron Paul was the winner of the clash of the Pauls. But that is very much beside the point. This wasn’t really a debate. Other than the fascinating moment where Krugman denied defending the economic policies of Diocletian, very little new was said, and the two combatants mainly talked past each other.

The real debate happened early last decade.

To wit:

Readers are free to make up their own minds who won that one.

And so, round two. Krugman wants more inflation; Paul is scared of the prospect. From Paul’s FT editorial yesterday:

Control of the world’s economy has been placed in the hands of a banking cartel, which holds great danger for all of us. True prosperity requires sound money, increased productivity, and increased savings and investment. The world is awash in US dollars, and a currency crisis involving the world’s reserve currency would be an unprecedented catastrophe. No amount of monetary expansion can solve our current financial problems, but it can make those problems much worse.

Or, as Professor Krugman sees it:

Would a rise in inflation to 3 percent or even 4 percent be a terrible thing? On the contrary, it would almost surely help the economy.


How so? For one thing, large parts of the private sector continue to be crippled by the overhang of debt accumulated during the bubble years; this debt burden is arguably the main thing holding private spending back and perpetuating the slump. Modest inflation would, however, reduce that overhang — by eroding the real value of that debt — and help promote the private-sector recovery we need. Meanwhile, other parts of the private sector (like much of corporate America) are sitting on large hoards of cash; the prospect of moderate inflation would make letting the cash just sit there less attractive, acting as a spur to investment — again, helping to promote overall recover.

Ron Paul believes that inflationary interventions into the dollar economy will have unpredictable and dangerous ramifications. Paul Krugman believes that a little more inflation (although he forgets that by the old measure of CPI inflation is already running at 9%, far higher than his supposed target) will spur economic activity and decrease residual debt overhang. Krugman seems to give no credence to the prospect of inflation spiralling out of hand, or of such policies triggering other deleterious side-effects, like a currency crisis.

The prospect of a currency crisis is a topic I have covered in depth lately: as more Eurasian nations ditch the dollar as reserve currency, more dollars (there are $5 trillion floating around Asia, in comparison to a domestic monetary base of just $1.8 trillion — the dollar is an absurdly internationalised currency) will be making their way back into the domestic American economy, and that this may have a steep inflationary impact. Additionally, many of the deflationary pressures that existed in 2008 or 2009 (e.g. shadow bank deleveraging) aren’t there anymore.

I don’t really know how much of this is to do with the Fed’s inflationary policies, and how much is to do with the United States’ role as global hegemon coming to an end. I tend to think that the dollar hegemony has always been backed by American military force, and with the American military overstretched and its funding increasingly debt-fuelled, the dollar’s role is naturally threatened. If America can’t play the global policeman for global trade, why would the dollar be the currency on global trade?

However it must be noted that America’s creditors do believe that their assets are threatened by the Fed’s inflationism.

As the Telegraph noted last year:

There has been a hostile reaction by China, Brazil and Germany, among others, to the Federal Reserve’s decision to resume quantitative easing.

Or as a Xinhua editorial put it:

China, the largest creditor of the world’s sole superpower, has every right now to demand the United States to address its structural debt problems and ensure the safety of China’s dollar assets.

Probably, the egg of American imperial decline came before the chicken of the recent inflationism, but that inflationism certainly has the capacity to worsen the problems rather than lessen them. After all, if America’s consumption-based economy is dependent on China’s continued exportation, and Krugman is advocating slamming creditors (i.e. China) by inflating away their debt-denominated financial assets, then surely Krugman’s suggestions imperil the already-fragile trans-Pacific consumer-producer relationship?

And this is a crucial matter — there is nothing, I think, more crucial than the free availability of goods and resources through the trade infrastructure, which is something that Krugman’s policies seem to endanger.

As commenter Thomas P. Seager noted yesterday:

[The situation today] is directly analogous to the first Oil Shock in 1973. In the decades prior, the US had been a major oil producer. However, efficiency gains and discoveries overseas resulting in an incrementally increasing dependence of foreign petroleum. Price signals failed to materialize that would caution policy makers and industrialists of the risks.


Then, the disruption of oil supplies from the Middle East caused tremendous economic dislocations.


Manufacturing is undergoing the same process. The supply chain disruption from the Japanese earthquake and Tsunami was merely a warning shot. Imagine if S Korean manufacturing were taken off-line for any length of time (a plausible scenario). The disruption to US industry would be catastrophic.


In the name of increased efficiency, we have introduced brittleness.

Time will tell which Paul is right. But I know where I stand.


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Fri, 05/04/2012 - 21:46 | 2398756 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

Are you sure? It looks like , Clooney vs Paul...   

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 22:14 | 2398788 Max Fischer
Max Fischer's picture



Krugman's quote beneath his picture is taken completely out of context. Conveniently, the reader isn't told that Krugman's quote about the Fed needing to replace the Nasdaq bubble with a housing bubble was actually a quote from Paul McCulley of PIMCO.  Krugman is merely paraphrasing McCulley.  It's a paraphrase of a quote taken out of context. 

Here's McCulley's actual quote in 2001: 

"There is room for the Fed to create a bubble in housing prices, if necessary, to sustain American hedonism. And I think the Fed has the will to do so, even though political correctness would demand that Mr. Greenspan deny any such thing.....

Neither McCulley nor Krugman were actually advocating for Greenspan to do this.  They were merely stating what the Fed would likely do to justify Bush's huge deficits and Bush's mandate to lower taxes on the wealthy.  The only way to square the math and keep the party going was to create a massive consumer bubble which would hopefully jack up tax revenue.  Without another bubble, Bush's tax cuts juxtaposed against his massive deficits would look like an immediate failure.

"Go shopping, Amuuurica....."



Fri, 05/04/2012 - 22:24 | 2398808 akak
akak's picture

Max Fischer, defender of the indefensible.

Max never met a statist whom he didn't like.

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 22:54 | 2398845 macholatte
macholatte's picture


Why, why, why does Krugman get so much attention?

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 00:15 | 2398924 Cosimo de Medici
Cosimo de Medici's picture

Krugman is a somebody because he won a prize with an asterisk.  In point of fact there is no Nobel for Economics;  it is an afterthought originating in 1968, but its winners pretend they have the official laureate, and others go along so the alchemists won't feel so bad.  Rumor is Krugman won because he bears a striking resemblance to Wilhelm Röntgen.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 00:37 | 2398933 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

Truth is, in Krugman's world, what he is presenting IS the solution. Inthis current set-up, print and inflate do kick the can, which is all they want. So, he is right.

And Ron Paul's talk is for the few out there who call th eemperor naked.

Doesn't change the fact that to prosper in THIS set-up, follow Krugman. If it's going to be a new world, then it sure as heck not going to be Ron Paul's world. 



Sat, 05/05/2012 - 06:19 | 2399061 Henry Chinaski
Henry Chinaski's picture

Truth is, in Krugman's world, what he is presenting IS the solution. Inthis current set-up, print and inflate do kick the can, which is all they want.

No kidding. In the NYT this morning...

Opinion » Editorial: A Warning From the Jobs Numbers

After the unmistakably weak employment report for April, it’s obvious that the economy will not heal itself without more government help.

And what's with the lame photoshop/paint blackout of the image?  I am pretty sure ZH wouldn't do that.  I wonder what someone was trying to hide.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 07:56 | 2399093 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

There you go HC. The system is set up so only it's remedies can work. New system is going to take breakdown......


Sat, 05/05/2012 - 09:02 | 2399125 Thomas
Thomas's picture

Here is Krugman's bubble quote. He does cite McCulley in defense of his moronic supposition, but he adopts his idiotic/clueless/reckless notion of the benefits of a housing bubble to become his own (last paragraph):

"And to do that, as Paul McCulley of Pimco put it, Alan Greenspan needs to create a housing bubble to replace the Nasdaq bubble."

Krugman as a self-absorbed idiot.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 19:29 | 2400076 mendigo
mendigo's picture

...must purge those words from my memory. It was a cruel measure placing that link to krugmans thoughts in your post.

What next you post a link to an abba song?

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 09:06 | 2399128 I am on to you
I am on to you's picture

Must be the same as Obama,he won for not keeping his word on ending the WARS.

 Is it beacuse,he looks a litle like M.L King,i meen the tan,and no offense to any one.

Then why dint Nixon get one,for his excelent job in Vietnam.

And The cowboy ,Ronald Regan,for his brilliant Iran Contra,aint no justice in this world!

And was Nobel ,realy Nobel.Or just" Pax Vomit Scum"like the rest.


Sat, 05/05/2012 - 02:25 | 2398992 HD
HD's picture

"Why, why, why does Krugman get so much attention?"

Well, Krugman is like 3 feet tall - about eye level with the average man's crotch. Considering how much he talks about "stimulus" it's just best to pay attention to what he's doing...

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 22:57 | 2398851 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

I like Mr. Fisher, and his " hawkish stance"!

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 23:06 | 2398860 Carp Flounderson
Carp Flounderson's picture

akak, holder of opinions which shall not be swayed by facts.

Sun, 05/06/2012 - 12:47 | 2400829 Temporalist
Temporalist's picture

It should surprise nobody akak that MF Trollboy, a Krugmanite, would stoop to lie just like Krugman himself.  Do as your masters tell you MF Noballs.

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 22:54 | 2398849 JR
JR's picture

Azizonomics got the Krugman quote right. According to febo on Octover 9, 20111: The full quote is:
“The basic point is that the recession of 2001 wasn’t a typical postwar slump, brought on when an inflation-fighting Fed raises interest rates and easily ended by a snapback in housing and consumer spending when the Fed brings rates back down again. This was a prewar-style recession, a morning after brought on by irrational exuberance. To fight this recession the Fed needs more than a snapback; it needs soaring household spending to offset moribund business investment. And to do that, as Paul McCulley of Pimco put it, Alan Greenspan needs to create a housing bubble to replace the Nasdaq bubble.”

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 23:33 | 2398869 Max Fischer
Max Fischer's picture



Azizonomics got the Krugman quote right...

No. He/it/they didn't.

He left out the part where Krugman attributed the quote to Paul McCulley.  Convenient, isn't?

Given that the entire point of your post was to verify Krugman's quote, how could you possibly get this wrong?


Fri, 05/04/2012 - 23:53 | 2398904 JR
JR's picture

Max, Krugman’s quote was not changed by the omission ofas Paul McCulley of Pimco put it” with ellipses, Krugman simply was embracing McCulley’s viewpoint with his own. It was totally Krugman's quote. 

Lighten up; it’s the weekend!

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 02:47 | 2399000 Max Fischer
Max Fischer's picture



The quote, as referenced in the article, deliberately makes it appear as if Krugman desires a housing bubble, and that was definitely NOT the case. The McCulley omission completely removes the context of the quote, and WHY Krugman chose the particular wording that he did. 

Given that I'm at ground zero for anti-academic, anti-progressive doomer goons, I know I'll never convince you of this.  But that's the fact, Jack.


Sat, 05/05/2012 - 02:54 | 2399001 fuu
fuu's picture

Keep toiling Sisyphus.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 04:22 | 2399041 Aziz
Aziz's picture

Max Fischer's logic is extremely spurious.

If I quote Ron Paul or Marc Faber in my essays to use their view to support my own then I am endorsing their views. So by implying that Krugman's quote did not endorse the housing bubble (even if his term was a little tongue in cheek) it is like saying Krugman is not a reflationist. 

Everyone knows Krugman is a reflationist, especially Krugman himself who makes reflationist arguments almost every single time he writes a blog post.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 08:30 | 2399108 francis_sawyer
francis_sawyer's picture

It is apparent that Max Fisher is a student of the "anti"-"Art of War" book... He's not interested in overall truths (winning the war), he just wants to waste everybodys time by getting them entangled in pesky insignificant skirmishes...

He's like the fucking "Washington Generals" of Zero Hedge... He loses every game to the Harlem Globetrotters 102-1, but goes home proud of himself because he sunk the underhanded Rick Barry free throw on the accidental foul which occurred when Meadowlark & Curly were busy entertaining the fans...

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 09:13 | 2399130 mendigo
mendigo's picture

The "need a housing bubble" does not make sense even after correcting for the krugman factor. Why reference krugman he is only a puppet of the statists. He is the snookie of philosophical debate on the state of the world economy.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 09:06 | 2399127 Benjamin Glutton
Benjamin Glutton's picture

 You are of course correct Max. Besides the plan to create a RE bubble was born of PD anger/losses from uninsured(no bailout) LTCM losses that they were forced to absorb. So the PD.s cooked up a derivatives regimen outside of securities law that effectively enabled PD's to print their own bailout.


What kind of a troll would try to shift blame from the responsible to a brilliant economist who was simply speaking in observation of current FED(Greenspan) dogma? PK's observation is a warning not an endorsement of reckless FED bubbles.


Secondly it could be argued that both Paul's are correct. One Paul constrains his debate to the reality of current monetary policy and the other Paul indulges his personal fantasy which sadly does not exist as an alternative.

Lastly, a noteworthy real world point of debate never materialized. RP never fails to insist that homeowners should have been bailed out instead of the Banks. This opinion is always among the first expressed by RP when discussing the bailouts but of course ignored by all. I have yet to see a single MSM article acknowledge the merit of clearing bad debt through homeowners which in combination with proper lending standards would have revalued homes, MBS and bailed out the banks. Bailing out faux insurance bets doomed the US economy to collapse and endless legal civil/criminal law accommodation compromising the very foundations of property law and hundreds of years of well established jurisprudence unnecessarily. 

The point of the quote by PK was that obviously the FED is doing the wrong thing by creating a new bubble. I agree with PK and would add that the FED themselves were well aware from the beginning that an RE bubble would end poorly for the nation. Anyone with an IQ above room temperature given the facts held by the FED could arrive at no other conclusion.

It is time to fully dismiss the notion that 'no one could have seen it coming' devoid of convenient scapegoating of low end minority lending when everyone knows the true damage was done by rampant overvaluation at the lower middle through top end range of mortgage underwriting. There is no cost/risk basis for blaming CRA or Fn and Fr for that matter.

A better question for Zerohedge to debate/answer is why the FED chose to wreck the economy.It is past time for Zerohedge to generate a complete autopsy and provide definitive conclusions regarding the FED/PD actions post LTCM/Tech.Bubble. Therein lies the answer to our current economic state.

We owe no less to our future.


Sat, 05/05/2012 - 09:28 | 2399134 mendigo
mendigo's picture

Holy shit! I love you, man.

...except I am blocking the reference to pk as brilliant economist
I do not understand many aspects of economics but when I have forced myself to read krugmans opinions he comes accross as more of a hair-dresser or cab driver. Though I fear I agree with him inthe end - there are only two ways out of this the one involves hard work, fairness and resposible government and the other is wild-ass ponzi collapse and new world order.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 11:33 | 2399300 Benjamin Glutton
Benjamin Glutton's picture

What PK offers is simplistic and correct in the context of a centrally planned economy. The brilliant comment was a poke at those who refuse to accept that we have a centrally planned economy.


I hate the centrally planned reality too but denial is dishonest.


Agreed on your suggestion of two ways out though I see the power struggle as being between local and central governments at various levels. Clearly local, State and in some cases National governments are losing power through unified central banking by previous extension of credit unsupported by current growth. This outcome was in fact entirely foreseeable and therefore can only be characterized as monetary warfare.

In support of power consolidation those who would stand in opposition of this monetary aggression are labeled commies which I perceive as a thinly veiled threat of actual warfare against our own citizens. 


Sat, 05/05/2012 - 14:07 | 2399565 mendigo
mendigo's picture

I strong agree with the setiment that my government perceives me as a threat and has declared war on the working class - the statistics are all lies, they are providing cover for the corrupt, they are implementing steal policies which benefit the connected at my expense. Some would say welcome to reality but this is something of a different sort.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 10:26 | 2399190 dougngen
dougngen's picture

maybe..... setting intrest rates at zirp was the wrong fed policy......maybe....gasp....they DID cause a housing bubble.....maybe.....they knew what they were doing....

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 10:32 | 2399195 JR
JR's picture

Krugman said it and he meant it. This is the essence of central planning: with the nation’s resources under your control you can try something and if it doesn’t work you can have your trolls or the media deny that you said it or did it -- even praise it or attribute it to your opponent. 

This is the pattern practiced by the centralized MSM; when their operatives misspeak, the media denies that they meant it. This is veiled censorship; propaganda. The pattern of lies carried everyday by the MSM is bad enough but for Krugman’s backers to supply him a personal band of trolls to defend his inanities on the internet – going so far as to say he said the opposite when the words are there for all to hear or see -- indicates just how far those who own the American press are frightened of the truth, frightened of public opinion.

To know Krugman is to know what he is saying. If you read his columns you know that he meant what he said. Krugman is Krugman.  If you want to know what Krugman thinks, read his statements.

What you ask us to believe in sincerity, Mr. Glutton, is what Richard Pryor asked in jest: "Are you gonna believe me or your lyin' eyes !?"

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 11:12 | 2399271 Multi
Multi's picture

"You are of course correct Max"...    no, Max is not neither you are.  Let's see:

"To fight this recession the Fed needs more than a snapback; it needs soaring household spending to offset moribund business investment. And to do that, as Paul McCulley of Pimco put it, Alan Greenspan needs to create a housing bubble to replace the Nasdaq bubble"

"To fight this recession the Fed needs ... soaring household spending ... And to do that, as Paul McCulley of Pimco put it, Alan Greenspan needs to create a housing bubble to replace the Nasdaq bubble"

Krugman is quoting McCulley to support his own view. I mean, this is just basic reading skills, nothing else to be disccused here.



Also, you said "RP never fails to insist that homeowners should have been bailed out instead of the Banks"  Pardon!!!???  Ron Paul, as far as I know, is AGAINST any type of bail out. I assume if he said anything close to what you suggest was in the case that IF goverment was going to bail out anyone, it should be the homeonwers instead of the banks. Which doesn't equate to him supporting homeowners bails out in any way.

But given that, as you said, Ron Paul never fails to insist in this it' should be quite easy for you to find a quote from him saying it. Please give us the link, or reference, so we can check this out. Thanks.


Sat, 05/05/2012 - 12:10 | 2399368 Benjamin Glutton
Benjamin Glutton's picture

it was among the first things that RP said in the debate with PK. Though your characterization of RP's meaning may be correct in his heart(no bail outs) I would submit in rebuttal that he has followed up that comment on numerous occasions by saying it is the peoples money. In support of that statement he usually adds that the money should have been used to bail out real people not the banks that caused the problem. He has gone on to add that the people will have to pay it back so why would you hand their money directly to the banks.


Though I recommend watching the entire debate you can jump to the 7 minute mark and hear RP give a shorter version of his usual when he says if "why bail out the banks...why not drop the money on mortgage holders with helicopters?" BTW notice PK is not some wild idiot and very clearly supports properly regulated capitalism not the ridiculous financialization we are forced to endure.

link to RP vs. PK

I will find more direct quotes.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 12:44 | 2399383 Benjamin Glutton
Benjamin Glutton's picture

here is RP clearly stating where the money should have gone @ 1:00 to 2:00 watch the video as it is an impromtu opinion freely expressed.


Ron Paul said

last month at a GOP debate:"Bailouts came from both parties…. If you have to give money out, you should giveit to  people losing their mortgages,  not to the banks."

In a practical sense you must acknowledge that he is just one Congressman but given the inevitability of some kind of bailout he is unequivocal about how that bail out should have been directed. It is therefore logical to assume that had he the power the bail out would have been directed at clearing mortgages.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 17:24 | 2399897 Multi
Multi's picture

Thank you for the links Benjamin.


Yes, he's talking about bailing out the mortgage holders. But I think my first impression was correct.

From the video "Ron Paul to Paul Krugman: Inflation Is Theft" in your first link:

at 7:30 minutes, "Why did the FED bail out the rich? Why didn't they give the money to the mortgage holders? ...that would have been more fair"

And from your sencond link:, at 1:57, "If you had to give money out you should have gave it to the people who where losing their mortgages not to the banks".

He's talking about rather bailing out the people than the banks given that you really want to bail out someone. But I believe it's a misconception to think that he wants to bail out anything in the first place.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 17:41 | 2399923 centipede
centipede's picture

Are you intentionally focusing on this unimportant issue? Everybody knows that RP is against bailouts. I think he stated it clearly many times. The fact, that he also said that if there has to be one he would rather bailout homeowners doesn't change a thing.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 21:09 | 2400186 Benjamin Glutton
Benjamin Glutton's picture

Are you intentionally focusing on this unimportant issue? Everybody knows that RP is against bailouts.

no, it is not my intention to put words in RP's mouth though they are his own. if you read through the speeches he made on the house floor pre bail out by the 4th or 5th speech he seems to agree that something must be done.

nevertheless even Ron would admit he is not a KING and given that fact and his numerous statements in support of actual taxpayers regarding his preference of bail out use I do think my characterization unfair.

what IS undeniable is that under no circumstance did RP think that as he states on numerous occasions BANKS should have gotten bail outs while their VICTIMS(his words)got nothing but the tab.


Obviously you realize we are in agreement regarding his true preference for no bailouts.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 20:39 | 2400155 NidStyles
NidStyles's picture

He's not advocating bail-outs you retard. He's saying that if you are going to bail someone out why not bail out the people that actually need it. He's merely pointing out the criminality of the people that pushed for the bail-outs.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 21:29 | 2400204 Benjamin Glutton
Benjamin Glutton's picture

OK TARD... flip it.


DO YOU honestly think RP would be making a similar argument on behalf of the BANKS if the mortgage holders had been bailed out?


do you need an ice pack?lol

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 13:26 | 2399490 centerline
centerline's picture

If one is going to dissect this in terms of PK or RP, then I would offer the following topics of conversation along the same line of your very well constructed post above:

1.  Why does PK continue to assert that banks do not matter in terms of creation of money/debt?  I won't bother going on about this as anyone around here with a couple of synapses to bang together knows that this is false.  So, why hide?


2.  Why does RP pussyfoot around the real issues when dealing with PK and Bernanke?  The questions and responses are loaded of course.  But the core issues never really hit the table.  Again, why hide?

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 17:29 | 2399904 Benjamin Glutton
Benjamin Glutton's picture

if you watch the entire debate notice that PK accuses banks of counterfeiting or money printing via repo. that is not the mark of a FED supporter without question. Listen carefully and what you find is that PK is somewhat in agreement with RP and ZH in general.


It is FIAT constraints and the practicality of debate therein that make PK seem radical.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 20:42 | 2400162 NidStyles
NidStyles's picture

Paul Krugman detracted the printing and said it should have been done purely by the Federal Reserve and in much larger quantities. He's stated this for the past 4 years on several occassions. Apologists like you can not warp reality for the rest of us that are not mental midgets that can't put forth a rational thought if they tried. Yes, I mean you.

Krugman is not even close to what you are claiming here.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 21:15 | 2400190 Benjamin Glutton
Benjamin Glutton's picture

I never denied that PK supports printing given our CURRENT situation.


I said he did not appreciate REPO counterfeiting/printing by PD at whim.


PK fully supports CB intervention as required. BIG DIFFERENCE.



Sat, 05/05/2012 - 15:37 | 2399717 Major_Freedom
Major_Freedom's picture

Actually Max is incorrect.

Paul Krugman said this in 2001:

"In time this overhang will be worked off. Meanwhile, economic policy should encourage other spending to offset the temporary slump in business investment. Low interest rates, which promote spending on housing and other durable goods, are the main answer.”

See the words SHOULD and THE MAIN ANSWER?  Those are advocacies, not mere descriptions.

All his other statements of low interest rates and generating housing booms are advocacies as well.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 10:21 | 2399184 dougngen
dougngen's picture

You got "anti-progressive" rignt!!!  Anti communist too!! (same)

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 12:41 | 2399414 amadeusb4
amadeusb4's picture

When did ZH'ers become such an army of zealots? ZH has definitely taken a turn for the ideological and I'm for one am sad to see this play out because I come here for market/economic analysis and then get barraged with Heritage Foundation headlines and Glenn Beck fanboys.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 20:45 | 2400163 NidStyles
NidStyles's picture

You must be new here, and with that in mind you are attacking us that have been here for much longer than you and calling us Glenn Beck Fanboys? When you speak all I hear is the stupid leaking from your skull.

Sun, 05/06/2012 - 02:49 | 2400410 amadeusb4
amadeusb4's picture

Thank you for the welcome. Since you know stuff around here, can you point out the ignore feature? i'd really like to use it now.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 15:31 | 2399709 Major_Freedom
Major_Freedom's picture

It WAS definitely the case, Max.

“In time this overhang will be worked off. Meanwhile, economic policy should encourage other spending to offset the temporary slump in business investment. Low interest rates, which promote spending on housing and other durable goods, are the main answer.”


You see the words SHOULD, and ARE THE MAIN ANSWER?  Those are advocating words, not mere descriptive words.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 19:46 | 2400098 WatchingIgnorance
WatchingIgnorance's picture

The fact is MF, if you can stop jerking Krugman for just a moment, is that our economy is a CONSUMPTION economy which, at some point in the future, is destined to fail for no other reason than it is a CONSUMPTION economy (i.e., there is no excess productivity for which one can save and thus become 'wealthy' in your sense).

So, how do we keep the train rolling, keep the sheeple spending and thus keep the illusion going? Why, we have to create bubbles to give the illusion of wealth, with each subsequent bubble bursting in a more spectacular fashion than the last. This last one was a booger, but the next one, as one can extrapolate, will be even more spectacular.

We have been living an illusion for far too long. All you guys decrying everything is fine is analagous to the farm hand herding all tghe cattle in to slaughter. You CANNOT grow INFINTELY in a FINITE universe. Eventually, you will hit the wall.

Go down to the Wal-Mart by my house on the 3rd and tell me everything is okay. These people couldnt feed themselves without a SNAP card. PERIOD!

Luckily for all you pompous economists, they are too stupid to do anything about it.

You make me sick.

Thu, 05/10/2012 - 17:09 | 2414697 Major_Freedom
Major_Freedom's picture



You are an imbecile.  Resources are not finite for practical purposes.  Yes, from the view of the creator of the universe, there is only a finite amount of stuff to move around, but for human purposes, we have only barely scratched the surface of the Earth.


You morons would rather humans live in squalor and live brutal, short lives, for the sake of mother Gaia, who is not to be disturbed.


You are not presenting a philosophy for life, you're presenting a philosophy of death.


Yes, life does seem sickening to those who champion death, but to be considered sick by people like you, tells me I am doing something right.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 20:11 | 2400125 Chump
Chump's picture

I never thought you were paid to post your nonsense here, until now.

Krugman quotes someone as support for his argument, but Krugman does not actually agree with the quoted support?  Could you possibly be more of a buffoon?  Give it a go, please...

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 08:29 | 2399107 BigJim
BigJim's picture

Haha, Max Fischer, Sophist Mundane, gets pwned... AGAIN.

You really are fantastically dishonest, aren't you Max? You've pretty much lost all credibility round here now... maybe it's time you changed your moniker again.

What will it be this time? I'm trying to remember the others... there was a Mark McGoldprick... pretty sure that was you...

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 13:43 | 2399517 fuu
fuu's picture

Redneck Repugnicant

Libertarians for Prosperity

and on and on and on and on and on

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 09:21 | 2399138 Inspector Bird
Inspector Bird's picture

Actually, a careful read of the whole piece seems to indicate Krugman wants it both ways.

He did credit someone else with the quote.  It was meant to be sarcastic.  But he's also a supporter of the policy, even if he was indicating he wasn't THAT PARTICULAR TIME.  Since then, almost all his commentary has been supportive of the behavior he seemingly diminished in 2002. 


Krugman is nothing if not consistent.  Consistent that he will say whatever is necessary to create controversy.  He thrives on people 'hating' him so he can continuously say he didn't say what people say he said. 


So I'll opt to side with you, Max, on this particular issue - he was sarcastic.  But try to prove that he hasn't supported that policy consistently since then.  In fact, his current stance is nothing more than a continuation of this particular point of view.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 20:49 | 2400167 NidStyles
NidStyles's picture

Hegelian Dialectics.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 10:19 | 2399180 dougngen
dougngen's picture

Back to HuffPO for you Max!!

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 15:32 | 2399708 Major_Freedom
Major_Freedom's picture

Max Fischer:


How could you possibly be right when everything you say contradicts reality?


Krugman in October 2001:

“In time this overhang will be worked off. Meanwhile, economic policy should encourage other spending to offset the temporary slump in business investment. Low interest rates, which promote spending on housing and other durable goods, are the main answer.”


You see the words "should" and "are the main answer"?  Those are advocacies, not descriptions.

Sun, 05/06/2012 - 10:46 | 2400649 MajorWoody
MajorWoody's picture

Go Max!


Sat, 05/05/2012 - 15:58 | 2398879 Al Gorerhythm
Al Gorerhythm's picture

Tell me that you aren't supporting the destruction of capital lent, so as to make the payment of debt easier for the borrower? Tell me that a 3 to 4 % interest rate is not the destruction of capital. Tell me that an increase in the money supply isn't a destroyer of the value of all previously printed chits. Tell me that you don't support the destruction of the value of savings through this insidious inflationary process. Tell me that Treasury issued money is the same as money created by borrowing it from the banks. Tell me if you think that the destruction of pensions and savings is the right thing to do, through the above process. Tell me that you have more to offer than a semantic argument. 

I guess that you can't. Not without making a dill of yourself at least.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 01:57 | 2398979 A Nanny Moose
A Nanny Moose's picture

So just because the idea did not originate with Kruggbear (no surprise there), he is absolved of all charges?

Hardly Maxi-pad. He drank the K00l-Aid, then distributed it. We are guilty of being stupid enough to elect people who listened.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 02:43 | 2398999 StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

Krugman was in bad company:

Barney Frank (Congressman) 2003:  "I want to roll the dice a little bit more in this situation toward subsidized housing."

Barney Frank 2008:  "I think this is a case where Fannie and Freddie are fundamentally sound, that they are not in danger of going under."

Maxine Waters (Congresswoman) 2003:  "If it ain't broke, why do you want to fix it?  Have the GSEs (Freddie and Fannie) ever missed their housing goals?"

Chris Dodd (Senator) 2004:  "This [Government Sponsored Housing] is one of the great success stories of all time..."

When Politicians tinker with the tax code to favor the sorts of investments they think people should make (i.e., Housing), we should NOT be surprised if market distortions result!

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 06:57 | 2399075 djcando
djcando's picture

Frank was/is a slob who always has food on his tie from lunches and dinners with banking lobbyists.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 10:30 | 2399193 dougngen
dougngen's picture

Nice!!!!! +10

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 09:33 | 2399142 Max Hunter
Max Hunter's picture

If your correct, then it is certainly disingenous of ZH to post that.. I'm not putting the time into researching it but, it would be fitting that that side of the coin experience a little of what we see consistantly when our views are expressed in MSM..

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 11:14 | 2399274 TWSceptic
TWSceptic's picture

Lying piece of ****


The quote is correct, as another user mentioned.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 14:19 | 2399587 sgt_doom
sgt_doom's picture

Conscience of a Schizoid:  the Paul Krugman Farce

Krugman draws parallels to the 1930s --- while ignoring all the jobs offshoring --- all the technology offshoring --- all the investment offshoring!

As long as Krugman chooses to ignore this --- and what constitutes the economic engine of the USA --- he makes no sense?

(True, there was offshoring of investment back in the 1930s with the investment in German munitions by Brown Brothers Harriman and JP Morgan invested, or financed, Mussolini’s invasion into oil-rich Libya, but nothing on today’s order.)

With the financial sector making up far too much of the GDP --- when Krugman, or anyone else, suggests further stimulus (and I heartily agree more stimulus is required) --- but then suggests ONLY putting it in the public sector (teachers, police, etc.) --- how in creation is that not short-sighted?

Again, Krugman ignores the dismantling of the economy with the offshoring of jobs, technology and investment and with the financialization of the economy --- which essentially only profits the banksters.

Krugman, of course, has long been a “free market” evangelist --- which is his ultimate blind spot (or fraudulent behavior) of self-denial and why he chooses to ignore all the variables.

With Krugman’s latest pronouncements (the crisis being more about household debt ? ? ?) he sounds like a member of the Sarah Palin School of Economics, and a close read of Krugman’s most important opinions indicates that he falls 93% of the time in the neocon camp but --- and this is the clincher --- 100% on the side of the banksters and Wall Street whenever massive financial speculation is involved.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 15:32 | 2399702 Major_Freedom
Major_Freedom's picture

Jeez, this false meme you Krugman acolytes are parroting has to die already.  


No Max, that quote wasn't "taken out of context."  Paul Krugman did ADVOCATE for a housing bubble built upon low interest rates set by the Fed.

Here is what Krugman wrote October, 2001:


“In time this overhang will be worked off. Meanwhile, <b>economic policy should encourage other spending</b> to offset the temporary slump in business investment. <b>Low interest rates, which promote spending on housing</b> and other durable goods, <b>are the main answer.</b>”

There are many more of these positive personal advocacies for the Fed to engineer a housing boom that can be found here:


Sat, 05/05/2012 - 16:51 | 2399831 Dane17
Dane17's picture

Krugman is a full retard self aggrandizing douchenozzle.

Hope that was helpful!

Sun, 05/06/2012 - 10:43 | 2400645 MajorWoody
MajorWoody's picture

Where's Ted Nugent?  I think he has another interview with some KY and rubber gloves this time

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 22:28 | 2398815 HoofHearted
HoofHearted's picture

Next up...Paul vs. Paul...epic rap battles in history! (Or we could just go with the Keynes vs. Hayek and call it even)

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 02:21 | 2398988 HedgingTexas
HedgingTexas's picture

have a 100 people thumb up this comment, and im sure it will become the highest rated comment, causing them to make it...

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 21:48 | 2398760 Lucius Corneliu...
Lucius Cornelius Sulla's picture

Krugman:  The Bernank's fluffer.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 08:42 | 2399114 Aziz
Aziz's picture

By the way, this actually touches on something important.

Krugman's role is very much to move the Overton window so Bernanke can appear moderate.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 08:58 | 2399123 kridkrid
kridkrid's picture

I could see that. And "what's in it for him"? -- when the other option is taken, he can always say, "see, had they only listened to me". Sociopaths like Krugman think differently than the rest of us.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 12:10 | 2399369 Muppet Pimp
Muppet Pimp's picture

Agreed.  >Guilty< for playing into it, but you take what you can get.

Nice one "Touches on something important" in response to the above.  Touche.

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 21:50 | 2398761 Talons Point
Talons Point's picture

Didn't they update the Cracker Jack box diploma's to mention that they aren't real? Either Krugman is a complete fool or a complete fraud with ulterior motives.

This too can be left up to the reader to decide.

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 21:51 | 2398763 infiniti
infiniti's picture

Anybody else ever take a day off from work (M-F business hours) and just casually walk around town? It's like the weekend never ends, tons of people out and about and fucking around; and I'm thinking to myself, WTF, am I the only mother fucker in the world that has a day job???

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 21:54 | 2398767 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

 I wish! They are scanning "rfd" chips to steal your soul Infinity!

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 22:14 | 2398798 infiniti
infiniti's picture

haha true!  SCAN THIS (Does the double-shooter aimed at crotch)

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 22:10 | 2398781 HoofHearted
HoofHearted's picture

Anybody ever go to the grocery store? Am I the only sap who pays with cash or a credit card while everyone else scans their SNAP card? Seriously, like five motherfuckers in front of me with the free groceries, some eating nicer cuts of meat than I'm willing to pay for. Half of these people have tatoos and piercings...did they decide to do that because they knew they didn't have to pay for food?

Complete fucking bullshit.

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 22:12 | 2398792 veyron
veyron's picture

The word is 'tattoo'

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 22:15 | 2398799 HoofHearted
HoofHearted's picture

So that was you in front of me? Figures...

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 23:19 | 2398874 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

 You're good shit " H/H". You remind me of some good memories!

   It only gets better! Never compromise, unless you know the outcome has a higher ratio, of life/living!

   1) Family

   2) respect/self

   3) Share

         Trust me, in your darkest hour/s, ( you will have a few), those qualities will save you!

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 22:12 | 2398796 infiniti
infiniti's picture

I'm willing to pay a little bit extra in tax to help people who are in a serious fucking bind or just can't make it for some reason. But yeah 45,000,000 people on food stamps, mostly kids... terrifying. Are their parents just lazy or is this country so structurally fucked that they realistically don't have the ability to put food on the table? I'd say it's a mix but Krugnanke's 3% screwflation policies are the dominant problem.


Absent the ability to pull-forward demand by way of a $1.4 trillion budget deficit, we are a 3rd world country and those food-stamp recipients are resorting to crime to get calories.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 01:15 | 2398955 drunkenlout
drunkenlout's picture

I willingly buy food for those who don't have it.  I take it to their house, and hand it it to them.  I don't trust any government intermediary to do that for me.  F the government.  Love the people.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 04:42 | 2399047 Hobbleknee
Hobbleknee's picture

Most people share your compassion.  The problem is, you can't leave it to the bureaucracy to decide where to draw the line.  Theft is still theft, even if it's for a noble cause, and I would rather see to it myself that my charity went to children with cancer, instead of gangsters, abortions etc.

Get the government out of our lives.  Let us keep our own money and give to charity where we see fit.


Compare gold dealer prices

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 11:08 | 2399256 logically possible
logically possible's picture

You would make a great Dr. Ron Paul supporter.

Mon, 05/07/2012 - 12:28 | 2403694 Hobbleknee
Hobbleknee's picture

I wrote the good doctor in on my ballot in the last presidential election :-D

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 12:18 | 2399386 Muppet Pimp
Muppet Pimp's picture

When the official policy is to reduce the 'stigma' associated with being a moocher by providing debit style EBT VS say having them go to a USDA warehouse to pick up rice, beans, cheese and milk, it should come as no surprise that there becomes no 'stigma' associated with mooching for your well being.  This is by design me thinks.  Very clever, make it socially acceptable, even normal to get through life via handouts.  Twilight Zone I tell you.

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 22:37 | 2398827 dwdollar
dwdollar's picture

You just described 3/4 of Walmart shoppers.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 20:53 | 2400179 NidStyles
NidStyles's picture

I did this last week actually. I was baffled at why traffic was so bad at 1 in the afternoon, and kept asking myself where the hell these people worked that allowed them to take such long lunches.

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 21:54 | 2398764 Manthong
Manthong's picture

Jim Rickards pretty much nails it when he says that they think they are adjusting a thermostat when in fact they are playing with a nuclear reactor..

                      and that the Fed is our greatest security threat.

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 21:54 | 2398766 Bollixed
Bollixed's picture

Ron Paul has an education. Krugman has a diploma. Big difference...

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 21:58 | 2398772 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

Krugman drinks lattes' with " Biden and Gore" , in a room filled with GREENSPANites.   They all Squirm away when the " Fed Tab" comes!

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 22:48 | 2398841 Harbanger
Harbanger's picture

What? He's a Professor of Economics and International Affairs at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public affairs.  Yale and MIT Alma mater. 

Professor, Economist, Genius, NY Times Columnist, Ivy Leaguer, Nobel Prize Winner, Bloomburg TV Host, All-Around Douchebag.  Where's the clueless economist?  He knows him well.

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 22:02 | 2398776 Cabreado
Cabreado's picture

And the Winner is...

The man who stands up to protect the Foundation and the Principles.

The subject matter of such a "debate" is the fallout of the seditious neglect of the same.

Get Krugman off my screen.

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 22:12 | 2398790 Darth Silver
Darth Silver's picture

I am pleased that Charlie munger views me as uncivilized. He long ago traded his ethics for govt cronyism. Remember when warren and Charlie used to talk about conservative balance sheets? And then they embraced a change from Mark to Market to mark to make up?

Well I do. So if uncivilized means solid conservative understanding of basic value, I am proud to be there.

I love how crazy uncle Charlie helps keep silver and gold prices down. I take delivery. Never look back.

Ron Paul is shootIng fish in a barrel with the krugman munger buffet crowd.

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 22:17 | 2398802 akak
akak's picture

The statist economic and monetary policies of sociopathic and parasitic bastards like Krudman have not only failed time after time, hundreds or thousands of times, throughout history, they have never FAILED to fail --- but we are always assured by lying statist swine that, this time, their self-serving policies are going to indeed work for the benefit of the average man.

I must add that last specification, as their centrally-controlled, statist economic policies do indeed always work --- for them.

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 22:30 | 2398803 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

 Enough with the joking! Ron Paul makes ( several ) valid points.  "Krugman" , has no credibility! He knows it.

   Let's move forward a bit. Two European [ appointees]. Van Rompee and that other Guy( before Indonesia),from a recent /Fitch downgrade!

Krugman then does the classic " end around" and blames inflation on the VERY CHARTS / Checks & Ballances, his " NObel Laurate"

 ILK put into place a " decade ago"!  ( this was nothing more than a " Manhatten fund raiser"!)


Fri, 05/04/2012 - 22:34 | 2398824 TheSilverJournal
TheSilverJournal's picture

Never and always should be very carefully used, but printing money NEVER helps the economy. All it does is redistibute resources from the money holders to the money printers in an inefficient manner. In the special instance where the money printers will actually use the money more productively, taxation is the form that the money should be taken from the money holders.

It's the printing that causes the booms and busts. You can only have deflation if there was first an inflation.

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 22:40 | 2398828 JR
JR's picture

If the Krugmans et al. stay in power come November, we’d better prepare for the aftermath of a failed dollar system.

Bernanke is reducing the real debt he’s created by depreciating the value of the dollar. A neat trick! That’s why the Fed screams deflation or low inflation, so it can continue the devaluation of the dollar (QE), fulfilling Krugman’s Keynesian dreams of wealth redistribution on America's “road to socialist serfdom.”

Fed central planners have damaged America’s prosperity mainly by interference with the market rate of interest through credit creation and printing money.

That’s why Keynesian economics, i.e., bureaucratic socialism, fails; it destroys the pricing mechanism provided by the law of supply and demand, the delicate balance between consumers and producers. And they know it.

The one candidate for president who has targeted this gross malfeasance of the Fed and hit a bull's eye everytime is Ron Paul. Even in his early writings below (2003), Paul identified how current monetary policies hurt the economy:

“Let there be no doubt: the business cycle, the stagflation, the recessions, the depressions, and the inflations are not a result of capitalism and sound money, but rather are a direct result of paper money and a central bank that is incapable of managing it.

“Our current monetary system makes it tempting for all parties, individuals, corporations, and government to go into debt. It encourages consumption over investment and production... Incentives to save are diminished by the Fed’s making new credit available to everyone and keeping interest rates on savings so low that few find it advisable to save for a rainy day. This is made worse by taxing interest earned on savings. It plays havoc with those who do save and want to live off their interest. The artificial rates may be 4, 5, or even 6% below the market rate, and the savers—many who are elderly and on fixed incomes—suffer unfairly at the hands of a Fed that believes that resorting to money creation will solve our problems and give us perpetual prosperity.

“Lowering interest rates at times, especially early in the stages of monetary debasement, will produce the desired effects and stimulate another boom-bust cycle. But eventually the distortions and imbalances between consumption and production, and the excessive debt, prevent the monetary stimulus from doing very much to boost the economy.

“The two conditions that result from fiat money that are more likely to concern the people are inflation of prices and unemployment.”

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 23:06 | 2398859 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

Any thoughts J.R.?   " Solomon Brothers and all".  The guy did squirell away some cash!

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 23:24 | 2398883 JR
JR's picture

Well, I liked that pix of the luncheon speakers laughing their heads off over “What Happened to the American Dream.”  And Roubini in hysterics over “What Could Possibly Go Wrong?”

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 08:58 | 2399122 mendigo
mendigo's picture

Its not just paper money - its mismanaged paper money stemming from irresponsible government. If the system were allowed to evolve logically money would become only bits in a database - infinitely traceable and recoverable. Nobody wants that to happen - it would level the playing field in a dynamic way.
Gold is a false idol - more easily manipulated than dollars.

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 22:40 | 2398832 q99x2
q99x2's picture

05-04-2012 IBD officially announces Market Correction.

I heard Max Keiser saying that Owners of stock are selling out of Zynga even though there is a required period of time to hold the shares after an IPO. Maybe that is part of the Jobs bill that Obama passed. Not sure. But for some reason insiders are now dumping shares ahead of the required holding time. Relatives of lots of politicians will likely be dumping FB in a few weeks.


Fri, 05/04/2012 - 23:04 | 2398842 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

Banzai-7 is a lot smarter than you think!  I would suggest taking some of his " IPO" / young company [CURVES] , for what they are worth, in the future!  He knows the game!

  Eg; Facebook    Use S/T treasury note curves as guidance.

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 23:07 | 2398864 Missiondweller
Missiondweller's picture

It doesn't work like that. Restricted shares will never clear the transfer agent.

Perhaps you mean there was insider selling of shares?

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 00:18 | 2398926 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

Plot a graph! Just like 1-3-5-7-10 treasury notes!  Inside cheeters, are worthless BUMS!!

  Look @ the company from inception! PLOT Revenue!

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 07:02 | 2399076 Everybodys All ...
Everybodys All American's picture

Selling short against the box. Plenty of ways to get around the restriction with an overseas account.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 01:01 | 2398931 Arkadaba
Arkadaba's picture

Wrt the Jobs Bill:

I also highly recommend Taibbi's first article on this subject (referenced within). As someone who works in tech and lived through the tech bubble(I think that is where I first heard the term vaporware) I'would be very leery about investing short-term in a zynga or a facebook - yes they have users but they all monetize through online advertising. In online advertising search ads do work but everything else - not so much - especially when it comes down to real sales/conversions (I've trolled through the logs of various online advertising campaigns). That being said, I think (if left alone and without Google dictating metrics (CTR really only works for search ads)) the marketplace will come up with its own solutions.

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 22:47 | 2398840 q99x2
q99x2's picture

End the Fed. I vote for Ron Paul. Occupy Bilderberg 2012.


Fri, 05/04/2012 - 22:54 | 2398844 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

 May wealth " Bequeath" you...

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 05:49 | 2399058 WTFx10
WTFx10's picture

Drone attack on Bilderberg, if its good for the supposed pakistan insurgents. Comman sense dictates that it whould be just and right for the real terrorists. I wonder what the out cry would be from the gangsters that did not get wiped out?

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 23:05 | 2398858 grekko
grekko's picture

More like Grocho Marx with Adam Smith!

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 23:12 | 2398868 catch edge ghost
catch edge ghost's picture

Declaration of Codependence
Invoking the Spirit of Jefferson - via Krugman

When in the Course of human-ish events, it becomes necessary for one flock to reinforce the political bands which have enslaved them unto Keynes, and to surrender among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind and sound money supporters requires that We, the sheople, should declare the causes which impel us to be delusional utopian wannabe messiahs.

We hold these truths to be self evident to anyone with a Nobel Prize, that all sheop are created to be made equal, by handicap or by subsidy.
- That they are endowed by their Lobbyist with certain unsonstitutional Rights, that among these are mandatory consumption, fixed pricing and the pursuit of yield in a negative real interest rate environment.
- That to secure these rights, puppet Governments are instituted among the sheople, deriving their just ridiculous powers from the consent of the frightened.
- That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of Diebold to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Muppets, laying its foundation on a fantasy and centralizing its powers in such form, as to us shall seem likely to benefit our student loan and 401(k).

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Muppets long established should not be changed for light and transient causes, bond yields over 7% are another thing entirely; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that sheopkind are more disposed to debt-fueled discretionary spending and speculation, while bubbles are inflating, than to right themselves by abolishing the ZIRP to which they are accustomed.

But when a long train of thought, or arithmetic, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to release sheopkind from its unbridled ingnorant bliss, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such logic, and to write many thousands of pages of complex Law to secure their future sevitude.

Such has been the patient sufferance of these flocklings; and such is now the Too Big To Fail which constrains them from altering their former Systems of Government. The history of the present Fed chairman is a history of repeated ease and usurptations of the pricing mechanism, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute monoply on the supply of capital. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world, on Zero Hedge or something.  Freaks.

In every stage of these centrally denied depressions We have Petitioned for Stimulus in the most entitled terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by the chairman repeatedly giving us everything we want. 

But now, WTF dude?

A Fed chairman whose character is thus marked by every act which may define an objective, reasonable, forward-looking human being who's also pretty good with numbers, is unfit to be the ruler of Our central bank. Give us QE or give us someone who will!

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Oriental brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable peg to us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our UN, IMF, WTO and our seats there. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, LMAO, and we have conjured them by the ties of our Lincoln Bedroom guests, to disavow these inconvertables, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence as Goldman is still unable to take over their capital accounts. They too have been deaf to the voice of Geithner. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Sovereign Debts, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, junior creditors in War, in Peace our iPad makers.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of big corporate media, we mutually pledge to each other our grandchildren's lives, our seasonally adjusted Fortunes, and our sacred Apple stock.

Okay, maybe not our Apple. But we mean business!

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 10:42 | 2399207 dougngen
dougngen's picture

Bravo!!!!! +10

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 23:30 | 2398889 Caviar Emptor
Caviar Emptor's picture

What the world needs now

Is Bux, sweet Bux

It's the only thing

That there's just too little of

-Paul K

But we can never go home again, to a pre-Nixonian world that Ronnie evokes. Even he stops short of truly promising to end the Fed. 

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 23:40 | 2398893 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

Krugman is one ugly assed mother fucker.

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 23:48 | 2398900 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

Nothing a piece of " TOP Sirloin", in a cage full of European " TECHNOCRATS" can't cure!

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 23:43 | 2398895 icm63
icm63's picture

Thats the shitting thing about economics, it requires a DEBATE...

Should be more rule based and not theory


Fri, 05/04/2012 - 23:49 | 2398901 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

 Agree 100%

Fri, 05/04/2012 - 23:47 | 2398899 Arkadaba
Arkadaba's picture

"I tend to think that the dollar hegemony has always been backed by American military force"

The reaction (slightly delayed) to Iraq's decision to sell oil in Euros in 2000 comes to mind. And I believe Iran is in the crosshairs for a similar reason. I was looking for some supporting references and came across an article written 2004 when Iran first started discussing selling oil in non-US funds. Still valid.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 00:08 | 2398918 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

 The biggest guns, decide " dollar cost averaging" <>

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 11:04 | 2399246 margaris
margaris's picture

Remember the dumb reporter who commented:

Gold is not backed by anything,

USDollar is backed by the US Government


Its the whole argument turned upside down.

Krugman is no smarter than this dumb chick.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 00:40 | 2398937 dexter_morgan
dexter_morgan's picture

Krugman is a brain stem, why does anyone listen to that assclown?

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 00:59 | 2398947 New American Re...
New American Revolution's picture

First off, China hasn't got a right to say shit.   The only reason they're holding the bag is because we've let them manipulate the yuan so they could steal America's manufacturing industries, literally shipping entire factories on a ship along with the jobs that create real wealth.   With that wealth gone, we've sold the seed corn, toppling construction because people can't afford a house anymore.   It's like a catalyst of domino's that Washington and Wall Street want to solve with insolvent creation of money that masqaurades as the real wealth it replaces but isn't.  But I'm preaching to the choir now.   If you want to really change things, we've got to take back the Congress.   It's the only thing left we can do, and it's doable.   See


Sat, 05/05/2012 - 01:50 | 2398977 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

 Respectfully! I'm amazed with the talent!  You are some beautifull posters!



Sat, 05/05/2012 - 02:47 | 2398995 shuckster
shuckster's picture

The difference in opinions comes from two schools of thought - "help me, screw the kids" and "help the kids, this is my responsibility". Krugman in the former, Paul in the ladder. Krugman, like all professors, is enjoying the mental self pleasuring of being a professor so much that he can't find time to think about the lives of future generations and how they will be affected. Paul, on the other hand, is ready to make all necessary sacrifices. He is a selfless man, and leads like one, even if not from any official position of power. Paul has a profound impact on the debate - he is serving as a mirror for which the two parties can reflect on themselves and see how selfish and pety they are being. But this makes them feel uncomfortable, because it makes their arrogance and gross self interest plainly visible for all to see. And it changes the discussion completely - from being a political debate to a moral debate. Ron Paul obviously has the upper hand when it comes to his morality. Even the best attempts to paint him as self interested fall flat. He simply is selfless. Their only other options is to black him out of the media, because, you guessed it "he's an Anti Semite". Like all Jewish people, the ones who own the media have no respect for America's constitution and values and cannot hide it in their opinions and descriptions of Gentiles. As far as those who are concerned, since Ron Paul is not a dear friend of Israel, he is a terrorist. However, we Americans do not view our leaders and our constitution as terrorists, we view them as Patriots. The Jews have sinned many times, and sooner or later God will punish them. I cannot speak from experience, because I am not Jewish and reserve no right to judge them, but their immorality has led them to this juncture. Their will be a political re-awakening in America and it will take the form of strong anger toward entities who've tried to deceive the public. And with every inch that Righeousness and Honesty gains in the battle against evil, it will push back evil two inches - like Roman soldiers in their tight shield formation, pushing back and stabbing their enemies relentlessly. America is a sleeping giant that does not like to be toyed with and when it wakes, it leaves destruction in its path

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 09:55 | 2399162 paint it red ca...
paint it red call it hell's picture

America currently slumbers with its rumbly tummy satiated on food stamps, welfare, disability, and SS checks that substitute for 1930's soup lines. Upward mobility is about to come to a halt for the less than aggressively ambitious or those under employed outside health care and federal government. Should the value of those benefits become compromised through inflation, the limits of our recently legislated security nation will likely be tested on the resulting disgruntled populace.

Krugman had better be careful what  he wishes for.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 10:09 | 2399172 Jim B
Jim B's picture

I have noticed the same thing.  It seems like the alphabet soup list of handouts will keep people apathetic until the whole thing collapses! It is a little troubling to me!  

When or if the implosion occurs, it will be real ugly! 

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 10:16 | 2399179 Golden monkey
Golden monkey's picture

"The Jews have sinned many times, and sooner or later God will punish them."

Ya know man, ya should get God's punishment  : you should be born a fat jew with a (mad) wife even bigger in that Benz passenger seat.



Thu, 06/28/2012 - 22:42 | 2572089 shuckster
shuckster's picture

Speak for yourself. 20 years of starvation in Germany created the Holocaust. 20 years of starvation the world over will create Armeggedon. Get ready to hide in the basement again

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 06:19 | 2399062 Motorhead
Motorhead's picture

And this clown Krugman has a Nobel Prize.  But, hey, Barack N'Obama and Yassir Arafat have Nobel Prizes, too.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 08:12 | 2399101 css1971
css1971's picture

The Nobel prize in economics is not even a Nobel prize. It's a fake one, Nobel didn't create it.

It is instead "The Swedish Central bank prize for 'economic sciences' (in memory of Alfred Nobel)".

Having said that, Nobel was the most hypocritical pacifist in the world.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 06:33 | 2399068 tradewithdave
tradewithdave's picture

Libertarian Paternalism of the Sunstein variety is the middle ground in the battle of the 2 Pauls.  Remember the Peter Paul candy company slogan.... sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you don't, but when it becomes serious you have to lie.

Dave Harrison

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 07:52 | 2399091 shovelhead
shovelhead's picture

I used to think that Krugman was nothing but an unmitigated party hack spewing the party line but now I'm coming to believe he's the same as a Roman pope facing Luther and would rather destroy the world than to admit he is in error.

Okay, that IS a bit grand for a nobody...

Let's just settle on a party hack.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 07:56 | 2399094 Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill's picture

Krugman and Uncle Warren, are ust the acceptable face of psycopathy.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 08:17 | 2399103 WAMO556
WAMO556's picture

YOUR RIGHT. For this guy to admit "error" would be akin to cutting his own throat. The fool has put ALL of his chips on the field and is shooting the dice hoping that he doesn't crap out. 7's and 11's are winners, but he roled an 8, and now is continuously shooting hoping that any numbers come up but 7 or 11. This Krugman guy is ALL IN. He has no other choice.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 10:03 | 2399169 Jim B
Jim B's picture

Good post, Krugman thinks it is your patriotic duty to let the government steal 3-4% per year from holders of USD.  This guy is such an ass hat! 

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 08:45 | 2399115 dcb
dcb's picture

I will be honest I like Krugman on social policy, but i'VE COME TO HATGE HIM ON MONETARY POLICY.

1) I'm a real social progressive liberal, he act as if to be against him on monetary policy means I'm right wing. I don't wee at all why those have to be related at all

2) I mention the changes in measuring inflation in letters to him and on his web blog. it never gets addressed or answered. So, he just happens to ignore anything that doesn't fir within his world view, no matter how much data you send his way. As a trained scientist I finde such behaviors deeply troubling. I think it holds for economists in general. How can one claim to engage in rational empericism and decide to ignore data, facts. etc. My guess is this is why ecconomics is so screwed up as a profession. they need a better teaching and training.

Things that are dogma in economis wouldn't be considered theories or even hypothesis in my training.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 10:48 | 2399213 dougngen
dougngen's picture

There is hope for you yet my friend.... 

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 09:50 | 2399157 centerline
centerline's picture

Face it.  Neo-classical economists, Keynesian economists are running the show.  Dug in like ticks.

I say fuck 'em.  This is not science.  It is dogma.  Give them a blank check and tell them to get on it with already.  Test that grand theory once and for all that a mountain of properly executed public debt is the cure to everything.

Of course, when it goes all wrong they will find some other reason to claim the theory was valid but the execution was flawed.


Sat, 05/05/2012 - 10:49 | 2399218 dougngen
dougngen's picture

Why not? Le them print to infinity!!! We would disprove Keynes once and for all and hit the reset button at the same time!!

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 10:05 | 2399170 Jim B
Jim B's picture

Krugman!  Where can I get a degree in stupid? 

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 11:10 | 2399263 PeaceLover
PeaceLover's picture

Same place you get degree in sellout right next to the me first school.
The school Ron Paul seemed to skipped.

If you need to to find the alma mater just check out the laws backed but congressperson.
Or how they don't cross the isle when it's not a stupid law or take jobs in the same field they are to protect the people from!

They sell out so cheap.



Sat, 05/05/2012 - 10:13 | 2399175 james larson
james larson's picture

I still am somewhat unsettled on the proper role of government in all this.  On one hand I get what Ron Paul is saying while at the same time understanding that retreating on some government involvement may be more destructive than not.  I have bigger issues with Krugman/Keynesian points of view in a general sense.  My concern with Keynsian thought are basically around validity of premise and lack of demonstrated evidence that they indeed do work in a near free market capitalist enviroment.  Im unconvinced Keynes has us in mind particularly when he returned from Soviet Russia and began writing.  I think he was impressed with the position/notion that economic activity...from growth to employment were or should be a function or at the least a by product of government involvment.  Perhaps he was most closely associated with Fabian Socialists which if my history is correct found themselves at home in The Labour Party.  So this guy becomes fashionable again?  Seems to me the last time he was fashionable was in the 1970's and we can recall how that worked out.

Dont misunderstand.  I agree that at times government intervention is correct and necessary as a temporary measure..but not as a forever policy.  Yet what I see happening here in the US isnt temporary.  I can make the case that little by little...regulation department there a near fabian socialist agenda has more and more responses to more and more economic "ills".  The corporate brand seems to be dismantled almost on a daily basis with threats to Exxon Mobil taxes, Gibson Guitar's import problem and Apples tax strategy give way to what is sold as "Concerned Government" that wants some imagined fairness and level playing field.  Why does this remind me of Harrison Bergeron from Vonnegut?

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 10:54 | 2399227 Smokey1
Smokey1's picture

Ron Paul eats shit.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 11:27 | 2399290 TWSceptic
TWSceptic's picture

Compared to Ron Paul, Smokey1 IS shit.

Sat, 05/05/2012 - 11:15 | 2399260 Hubbs
Hubbs's picture

Out of context, completely out of context, Krugman's arguments make sense. However, once any context of morals, work ethic, or "playing according to the rules" eneters the discussion, Krugman is basically saying:  "Beware any of you who do honest, productive work and try to save...we Keynsians are here to screw you over. The money is the screw, and the government is the screwdriver."



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