The Ultimate Krugman Take-Down

Tyler Durden's picture

Forget Ali - Frazier; ignore Santelli - Liesman; dismiss Yankees - Red Sox; never mind Silva - Sonnen; the new undisputed standard by which all showdowns will be judged happened in Spain over the weekend. During a debate on Europe's crisis, Pedro Schwartz (a mild-mannered Spanish 'Austrian' economics professor) took on the heavyweight Paul 'I coulda been a Fed Chair contender' Krugman, and - in our humble opinion - wiped the floor with his Keynesian philosophy. From the medicinal use of more debt to fix too much debt, to the Japanization of world economies and the demand-side bias of every- and any-thing - interested only in the short-term economic growth; the gentlemanly Spaniard notes, with regard to the European crisis, the fact that "Keynesians got us into this mess and now we have to sacrifice our principals so that they can get us out of this mess". Humble and generous in his praise - though definitively serious with his criticism - Schwartz opines: "Often Nobel prize winners are tempted to pontificate on matters that are outside the specialty in which they have excelled," noting "the mantle of authority whereby what ever they say - whether sensible or not - is accepted with resignation from some and enthusiasm by others." Krugman's red-faced anger is evident at the conclusion as he even refused to shake Schwartz's hand after the debate.

For 15 minutes of both education and entertainment - this is as good as it gets...

  • Starting from around 35:00 the Spanish professor praises and criticizes in a thoughtful and gentle tone
  • At around 39:00, he addresses the demand-side description of the world
  • Krugman's less-than-happy response (which sparks quite a rowdy argument) begins around 48:20

 

(h/t Jean Luis Martin of the Truman Factor)

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Yen Cross's picture

 Krugman has quite the "Jelly Belly" , from all his quasi/liberal pals @ the " New York Times" , Luncheons! On the taxpayers dime!

WestVillageIdiot's picture

They are not quasi-liberals.  They are liberals, alright, in the modern sense of the word.  The word "liberal" now means nothing more than a hater of personal freedom and a lover of big government, big government that will tell everybody how to live their lives (no soda over 16 ounces) and still have plenty of room at the trough for its favored zealots.

That is what a liberal is.  Paul Krugman is definitely a liberal.  The NY Times is loaded with liberals.  They are haters of freedom and common sense.  They are hates of personal responsibility.  Their dream world is a crater but god damn it, it is their crater. 

FFox's picture

And you Bushkoff neo-cons have done such a wonderful job aaeee?

Who was in office when the economy blew up dingle head... neo-cons!  Remember your guy... Hankee Paulson... bankster con... so the tea party conservative dingle heads can weep all you want... cause your ilk are the dumest sheeple in the shearing line.

President Dwight D. E. would roll over in his grave... along with Mr. Goldwater, for what passes as conservative these days.

Criminals at work every minute of every day... in fact every mico second with their high speed trading rip offs (tip of the iceberg) and bankster funded campaigns.

Neo=con sucess story:  The sheep are now shearing each other!  What power they!

Neo-con men handed trillions to the neo-con loving banksters... and you think liberals are dumb!

Hey.... we would have actually built something with that money... maybe help with a decaying infrustructure to start.... mr. dingle head, neo con man.

WestVillageIdiot's picture

Nice job with the straw man attempt.

I love moronic liberal arguments.  "You disagree with liberalism stupidity so you must be a Fox News wathcing neo-con, Bush loving, bankster embracing conservative hack."

You're an idiot.  If the subjedct here was the jackasses like Bush or Paulson I would be just as criticial.  But the subject here is that asshole Krugman and he proudly proclaims himself a "liberal".

Now go get your fucking shine box.

i-dog's picture

Ummmm ... the neo-cons are led by Kissinger, Brzezinski, Perle, Kristol, Rockefeller,.........

U R konfused, boy!

RiotActing's picture

Who the fuck engineered this audio? They need to be shot...

LetThemEatRand's picture

I thought they were both incredibly smug, and they are both wrong because they both ignore human nature in favor of theoretical models that do not exist in reality.

Hype Alert's picture

Krugman: 49:30 "In a way, nature has given us an excellent experiment"?  BS!  Nature had nothing to do with this crisis, the professor is spot on!  "Keynesians got us into this mess and now we have to sacrifice our principals so that they can get us out of this mess"

ejmoosa's picture

I sure as hell did not hear Krugman explain what has happened to Japan.  How has that "experiment" turned out?

Miles Kendig's picture

Krugman, the Vicar of perfection simply cannot comprehend that anyone would fail to encompass the infailability of his brilliance, in every subject matter.

Looks like Krugman wishes to echo Rojoy's comment about Uganda by saying the US isn't Spain, you ignoramus of the Austrian ghetto.  Now borrow more money you stupid fuck.

SMC's picture

Pedro Schwartz rules!   Awesome!

Thanks!

 

 

world_debt_slave's picture

I doubt Krugman even knew it is impolite to point the bottom of your shoe at someone.If Krugman was in an Islamic country,he wouod've probably been stoned to death.

Sophist Economicus's picture

Note to conference planners - move the venue to Saudi Arabia next time

WestVillageIdiot's picture

"They'll stone you when you are young and able
They'll stone you at the breakfast table

They'll stone you when you are on the rag
They'll stone you when you are a douche-bag"

Apologies to Bob for taking license with that one.

cohutt's picture

Look carefully and you can spot the Moobs growing under his lapels

Offthebeach's picture

Give Paul a break. Bwarny Fwank didn't come back to Paul, and just married "DudKrug, much younger then Krugman.

I suppose he could beard Mo Dowd as "the husband ". But her drinking, a all those cats and the cat piss stink

WestVillageIdiot's picture

I just had an awful vision of being in hell and having Satan tell me that my punishment is that I have to titty-fuck Krugman.  That is going to leave a scar. 

palmereldritch's picture

"Often Nobel prize winners are tempted to pontificate on matters that are outside the specialty in which they have excelled," noting "the mantle of authority whereby what ever they say - whether sensible or not - is accepted with resignation from some and enthusiasm by others"

Translation: (Real) Money talks.  Bullshit walks.

Take a walk Krugman.

Slipmeanother's picture

Krugman is a perfect example of KNOWING he is one of the chosen ones---fck him, hes just another overinflated ego

Temporalist's picture

At about 13 min in he says you would be looking at the chart of unemployment and saying "Something is very wrong here; we desperately need policy."

No you androgynous chinchilla, POLICY is what created that chart.  Neo-Keynesianism created that chart.  Neo-Keynesianism will make that chart worse.

Debt does not create growth.  Ask a farmer what happens when you spread too much fertilizer..actually he spreads more fertilizer than all the farmers in Spain.

fuu's picture

"No you androgynous chinchilla"

<golf clap>

holdbuysell's picture

Krugman at 49:30: "Nature has given us an excellent experiment at vast human cost, but we've just had an experiment...."

And duly noted.

rex-lacrymarum's picture

By this Krugman apparently tries to respond to a major methodological problem Austrians have pointed out. All economic schools that rely on empiricism suffer from it, namely the fact that controlled experiments are simply not possible in economic science. We cannot go back in time and persuade Obama not to enact 'stimulus' spending, so  experimental proof of whether it would have been better can not be supplied. That proof can only come from sound theory. Sound theory is the instrument by which we can properly interpret economic history. Needless to say, Keynesian theory is not sound. It is nothing but the same hoary inflationism and underconsumption hogwash that Keynes' ideological predecessors have preached, from monetary cranks like Silvio Gesell to Wadill and Catchings with their rigid circular flow model of the economy. Neither the Keynesians nor the monetarists (Keynesians-in-drag) possess a credible theory of capital, and they are therefore missing a decisive piece of the economic puzzle. 

q99x2's picture

Sissy, Krugman is a Sissy. Ha ha ha ha ha ha.

azzhatter's picture

he is pretty faggy acting. Man up krug you just got bitched slapped

Oldrepublic's picture

I am not an expert in the art of Spanish swordsmanship, but it seems that the good Spanish professor’s ancestors were quite knowledgeable in that noble art. The professor seems to have finished off the professor from Princeton with a good rapier thust

WestVillageIdiot's picture

"My name is Inigo Montoya.  You killed my father's economy now prepare to die." 

CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

My father's name was Antonio Andolini... and this is for you.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCdXiOssbM0

 

surf0766's picture

We can surely see he is not in need of a fine meal.

WestVillageIdiot's picture

You could probably feed a family of four for a week with what you pull from his beard. 

e92335i08's picture

I don't even know how that idiot Krugman even won the Nobel Prize. He's a piece of SH*T. The world would be a much better place if he wasnt around.

Seasmoke's picture

same way that Obama did......its meaningless

WestVillageIdiot's picture

It was about trade policy, not monetary policy.  Plus, the Nobel for Economics is a bullshit award that was bought for the banker.  It is like Homer Simpson getting his award for Excellence.  Meaningless beyond belief. 

wagthetails's picture

What did the five fingers say to the face? SA-LAP. All kindding aside, excellent. Although i do feel bad for Krugz, he probably had no idea he was going to be attacked so violently. But some of that may also have been lost in translation.

WestVillageIdiot's picture

You lost me at "i do feel bad for Krugz".  Fuck him and the horse that rode him in. 

Everybodys All American's picture

Krugmans defense falls completely apart without LIEbor manipulation of interest rates and inflation by central banks. BTW what a fucking asshole.

Catflappo's picture

This is handbags at five paces.  Booooooring.

The Shootist's picture

I'd say. I'm just here for the cage match. Nigel Farage would have brought him closer to stroke, or Michael Savage. Oh wait, he's probably banned from Europe.

WestVillageIdiot's picture

Bring back dueling and so much of this shit would not be happening.  There would be a line of thousands challenging Krugman to a duel.  He would surely have to leave the country. 

Duke of Con Dao's picture

following thematically I mashed this together from the best bits from today's LIBOR inquiry 

by Parliament... there are a few scenes where Paul Tucker looks like he ate the proverbial sh*t sandwich!

YouTube - Squirm Worm, Squirm! Chairman Paul Tucker roasted by Parliament Inquiry over LIBOR Manipulations  (70 seconds)

Coke and Hookers's picture

Circular logic is always fun. Krugman said that the past four years (the biggest crisis since 1929 and follows decades of keynesianism) support keynesianism because interest rates and inflation haven't exploded. This is total bullshit for several reasons:

- The crisis comes as a result of keynesian economics - it's hard to argue that austrian economics have run the show for the last 10-20 years.

-  US inflation rate has hovered between 6-8% in the last 4 years if it's measured the way it was in 1990. The criteria for inflation measurement are adjusted regularly to make it look low. Why do inflation measurements need to be manipulated if inflation is not a problem?

- Interest rates in the US and Europe are rigged. Keynesian government spending takes the form of low interest money that's pumped into the system. That invalidates the argument and Krugman tries to fool people into thinking that markets control interest rates - which they don't. Keynesianism expresses itself in low interest rates and then Krugman says that low interest rates support keynesianism!! Also, interest rates for certain EU states are horrendous. Interest rates on credit card debt and several other types of debt are massive. I would say that in some cases interest rates have exploded despite the effort to artificially keep them down to stimulate consumption a la Keynes.

Krugman and other Keynesian economists believe that there is no (nor should be) relationship between creation of wealth and consumption. Consumption can happen without corresponding creation of wealth - or in other words: wealth creation can drop while consumption stays the same. This is beyond stupid. Let me explain: As the US has moved further into being a service based economy (read: manufacturing has been gutted) the difference between consumption and wealth creation has been bridged by seizing future money which is then dumped into the market at low interest rates. This has not stimulated wealth creation - which is in fact still dropping. This, according to Krugman, is great success. What the spending of future money has stimulated are the service sector that's eating the US from the inside, and Chinese manufacturing. It hasn't stimulated wealth creation in the US at all. What keynesianism has really done is snuffing out the relationship/balance between real creation of wealth and consumption. It finances consumption with future money and stimulates services that create no basic wealth.

khakuda's picture

If you didn't look so much like Blankfein, I'd nominate you for Fed chairman! Brilliant and cogent response.

Coke and Hookers's picture

One more point: Krugman or other keynesians would never admit that they are advocating the split between wealth creation and consumption. The way they see it is that spent money equals wealth created. If the government conjures up 20 grand and gives to me, it doesn't matter to them what I spend it on. Spending it all on 100 dollar blowjobs is equivalent to spending it on a car. If I buy 200 dollar blowjobs instead 100 dollar ones, it signifies more efficiency/wealth creation in their book - not more inflation in blowjob pricing.

This explaines why keynesians see no difference in state spending and private consumption and why taxing the shit out of everybody is no problem. All the money will all be spent eventually and at the point of spending will create wealth, regardless of where it goes.

This is an exceedingly simplistic and even banal example but that's what keynesianism is: Simplistic and banal theory for collectivist simpletons.

WestVillageIdiot's picture

One of Krugman's main rules in his textbooks is, "one person's spending is another person's income".  This was discussed in this debate.  Sadly, the moron Krugman takes this to an extreme that would embarrass a child.  He believes that if you just keep spending and spending everybody will be loaded with income.  Nowhere in there is there any mention of saving.

Pure stupidity in its purest form.  He must be loved on CNN. 

Escapeclaws's picture

Steve Keen addresses precisely this point,"one person's spending is another person's income", in a great article at his website, http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/

See the article he wrote called "Private Debt and Aggregate Demand".

 

paint it red call it hell's picture

+10

for anybody that can work blow jobs into a economics theory critique, frigg'n genius

Blue Horshoe Loves Annacott Steel's picture

Keynesian economics does create wealth...

somewhere else.

web bot's picture

Professor Imyme Krugman.

What a pompous ass. Schwartz's comment about mantle of authority is BOSS and with that, he owned Krugman.

janus's picture

may the muthah-fuckin SWARTZ be with JANUS!!!

goddam, professah!  maybe all of you don't require herding into work-camps.  some of you may be worth a squirt of piss -- maybe more than that.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebJ-4hjNZRM

impressed is janus.

and here's one fer you, krugman (the prince of petulance)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raFmzpvuYa0

now while you're out gang-bangin/

tryin to catch a murder case/

your ho's on my couch gettin fucked in the face/

bumpin to the base of some ole school rap jams/

this ain't tennis but, yo, i'll use my back-hand/

on any grown-man that tries to check janus/

i wanna head bang i gotta hip-hhop/

cause i'm gonna stick with what got me paid/

lickin that coochie with a high-top fade/

...i told you ho's before/

...i want my kakais washed, starched and creased/

i wanna order of fries with a side of grease/

i wish for peace throughout this land/

i want the whole fuckin world in my hand,

janus (ain't you a lil old to be trickin/ you see my mask and bag, bitch, i ain't bull-shittin)