United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Liberal Paul Krugman: A Massive, Destructive Earthquake would be Great for the Economy
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.punditpress.com/2011/08/liberal-paul-krugman-massive.html
Published: Aug 24, 2011
Author: punditpress
Post Date: 2011-08-24 16:10:45 by no gnu taxes
Keywords: None
Views: 15466
Comments: 36
You may be aware that a 5.8 magnitude earthquake struck the east coast yesterday evening. Luckily, the quake did little damage. However, you may also be aware that Nobel laureate Paul Krugman is missing a few marbles. According to him, it is actually a tragedy that the earthquake was not horrendously destructive. I do not know if I have ever read anything so stupid, but what would you expect from Paul Krugman? From Google+: If you aren't an idiot, this is a very clear case of the "Parable of the broken window." Here is the original text outlining the idea. Unfortunately, Mr. Krugman is apparently illiterate or simply a moron: --- Suppose it cost six francs to repair the damage, and you say that the accident brings six francs to the glazier's trade—that it encourages that trade to the amount of six francs—I grant it; I have not a word to say against it; you reason justly. The glazier comes, performs his task, receives his six francs, rubs his hands, and, in his heart, blesses the careless child. All this is that which is seen. But if, on the other hand, you come to the conclusion, as is too often the case, that it is a good thing to break windows, that it causes money to circulate, and that the encouragement of industry in general will be the result of it, you will oblige me to call out, "Stop there! Your theory is confined to that which is seen; it takes no account of that which is not seen." It is not seen that as our shopkeeper has spent six francs upon one thing, he cannot spend them upon another. It is not seen that if he had not had a window to replace, he would, perhaps, have replaced his old shoes, or added another book to his library. In short, he would have employed his six francs in some way, which this accident has prevented. --- Let me go even further than this convincing scenario. Suppose the earthquake had heavily damaged a highway. It might cause the government to spend a few million to fix it up, right? To Krugman, this would be economic growth. But he simply does not account for the money manufacturers will lose because they cannot send their products on efficient roadways or the lost time spent on fixing the highway. But on the bright side, someone slammed Krugman and got plenty of kudos from other Google+ readers: I certainly do not want to know what Krugman thinks of Hurricane Irene.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 24.
#1. To: no gnu taxes (#0)
Exactly. As soon as I saw his comment, that's immediately what popped into my mind. Krugman- like ALL the Keynesian cranks- are INSANE.
In fairness, there appears to be some doubt Krugman actually published this. But in return fairness, is there any doubt he thinks like this, given his track record?
What is stupid is posting this article and claiming that although possibly false, it could be true. Clicking on the Google link in the article returns this: Google 404. That’s an error. The requested URL was not found on this server. That’s all we know.
And given that this is an ACTUAL Krugman quote, who wouldn't believe he would also have made the mentioned statement: After 9/11, Krugman wrote: “Ghastly as it may seem to say this, the terror attack — like the original day of infamy, which brought an end to the Great Depression — could even do some economic good.”
You and your ilk are so blinded by hate that you fall for this stuff everytime. Unbelievable! Right-Wing Media Eagerly Attack Earthquake Comment From Fake Paul Krugman 4 hours and 43 minutes ago by Karen Famighetti Yesterday, a post appeared on a Google+ account representing itself as belonging to Nobel Prize-winning economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman: The trouble is, Krugman doesn't have a Google+ account and did not make this statement. This morning, a post from Krugman on his actual New York Times blog explained: Well, this is interesting. I hear that the not-so-good people at National Review are attacking me over something I said on my Google+ page. Except, I don't have a Google+ page. [...] Apparently some people can't find enough things to attack in what I actually say, so they're busy creating fake quotes. And I have enough on my plate without trying to chase all this stuff down. So if you see me quoted as saying something really stupid or outrageous, and it didn't come from the Times or some other verifiable site, you should probably assume it was a fake. A number of right-wing outlets jumped on this statement without bothering to check whether the Google+ account actually belonged to Krugman. The Washington Examiner's Tim Carney
So? I already addressed that. But he did make this statement: After 9/11, Krugman wrote: “Ghastly as it may seem to say this, the terror attack — like the original day of infamy, which brought an end to the Great Depression — could even do some economic good.”
Your quote in context: SYNOPSIS: The worst tragedy in American history will not necesarily drive us into recession It seems almost in bad taste to talk about dollars and cents after an act of mass murder. Nonetheless, we must ask about the economic aftershocks from Tuesday's horror. These aftershocks need not be major. Ghastly as it may seem to say this, the terror attack -- like the original day of infamy, which brought an end to the Great Depression -- could even do some economic good. But there are already ominous indications that some will see this tragedy not as an occasion for true national unity, but as an opportunity for political profiteering. About the direct economic impact: The nation's productive base has not been seriously damaged. Our economy is so huge that the scenes of destruction, awesome as they are, are only a pinprick. The World Trade Center contained 12 million square feet of office space; that's out of 375 million square feet in Manhattan alone, and 3.5 billion in the United States as a whole. Nobody has a dollar figure for the damage yet, but I would be surprised if the loss is more than 0.1 percent of U.S. wealth -- comparable to the material effects of a major earthquake or hurricane. snip Now for the bad news. After the attacks, I found myself wondering whether some politicians would try to exploit the horror to push their usual partisan agendas. Then I chided myself for such an uncharitable thought. But it seems you can't be too cynical; sure enough, the push is already on to sell tax breaks for corporations and a cut in the capital gains tax as a response to terrorism.
Do you really expect any of those three to understand, let alone, care about context?
Krugman was impersonated: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/24/paul-krugman-impersonator_n_935186.html
But it was a spot on impersonation completely consistent with Krugman. That's the beauty of it.
No, it wasn't.
LOL Of course it was.
need I remind you that conservatives routinely argue that the second world war ended the great depression?
"Conservatives" like who? George Bush? Jerry Ford? Truman ended the Great Depression when he radically reduced government spending at the end of WWII. Truman rejected the Keynesian nonsense of keeping the war time economy intact. The Keynesians told Truman to keep building tanks and bury them in the sand to support "full employment". Truman told the Keynesians to take a hike. Truman was right. Yes Truman was very partisan, but he was correct. In the post WWII era we've had 3 great administrations: Truman Reagan Clinton / Gingrich -- I hyphenate this because Clinton wouldn't have done it on his own. But he did do it with some pressure, so he deserves credit. Obama won't. We've also had a lot of really horrible administrations -- Johnson, Nixon, Carter, Bush II, and Obama. It's a sad indictment on this country that we've had more horrible Presidents than good ones in the last 55 years.
#30. To: jwpegler (#24)
even though you keep repeating that same line, it still isn't true.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestIf you aren't an idiot, this is a very clear case of the "Parable of the broken window."
#2. To: Capitalist Eric (#1)
#4. To: no gnu taxes (#2)
In fairness, there appears to be some doubt Krugman actually published this. But in return fairness, is there any doubt he thinks like this, given his track record?
#6. To: lucysmom (#4)
#8. To: no gnu taxes (#6)
#9. To: lucysmom (#8)
#10. To: no gnu taxes (#9)
(Edited)
#12. To: lucysmom (#10)
#13. To: war, lucysmom, no gnu taxes (#12)
#15. To: go65 (#13)
#17. To: no gnu taxes (#15)
But it was a spot on impersonation completely consistent with Krugman. That's the beauty of it.
#19. To: go65 (#17)
#20. To: no gnu taxes (#19)
Of course it was.
#24. To: go65 (#20)
(Edited)
need I remind you that conservatives routinely argue that the second world war ended the great depression?
Replies to Comment # 24. Truman told the Keynesians to take a hike.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 24.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]