Yeah, a number of Republicans also love it. The line today is "We don't agree with some of the numbers, but the priorities are in the right place."

On another front, it's also heartening to see that the budget projects $645 billion in revenues from the sale of emission allowances. After years of denial and delay by its predecessor, the Obama administration is signaling that it's ready to take on climate change. ...

Yeah, take on climate change by forcing manufacturing companies to leave the US to go to places where they don't have to deal with "cap and trade" schemes and anti-employer labor laws.

Not saying its right or good, just saying its reality.

Damn right subby! Krugman is only a Nobel-prize winning economist and a centenary professor at the prestigious London School of Economics.

What could this douchebag possibly know?

Let me also say I am SHOCKED that Krugman supports Obama's budget. He's been on Obama's side since day 1 of the campaign it seems.

Rev.K: Damn right subby! Krugman is only a Nobel-prize winning economist and a centenary professor at the prestigious London School of Economics.

Ooh, ooh I know this argument trick! Appeal to authority!

KaponoFor3: Let me also say I am SHOCKED that Krugman supports Obama's budget. He's been on Obama's side since day 1 of the campaign it seems.

Ooh, ooh I know this argument trick! Guilt by association!

Yeah, Krugman was only warning about the impending housing bubble collapsing in 2002, although almost everyone ignored him. He's an idiot.

/sarcasm

KaponoFor3
Ooh, ooh I know this argument trick! Appeal to authority!

Umm... subby wasn't exactly appealing to hard data and compelling logic with his criticism of Krugman. Oh no! He's scary!

Given that argument, it's fair to respond with, "dude, he's a highly respected, nobel prize winning economist."

KaponoFor3: Yeah, take on climate change by forcing manufacturing companies to leave the US to go to places where they don't have to deal with "cap and trade" schemes and anti-employer labor laws.

I seriously doubt that this scenario will become a reality. Besides our manufacturing base is cut to the bone as it is, and only a small percentage of our manufacturing base are carbon emitters. The place where these pollution standards are going to hit are going to be factory farms, electric plants, and refineries... all of them industries that cannot be moved off shore without an even more significant loss of profits.

ricewater_stool: Yeah, Krugman was only warning about the impending housing bubble collapsing in 2002, although almost everyone ignored him. He's an idiot.

Hell *I* could have told you in 2002 there was a housing bubble. We were in the middle of a recession, yet housing prices were increasing at double-digit rates. You don't need a Nobel Prize to tell you something's screwy with that situation.

absoluteparanoia: Ooh, ooh I know this argument trick! Guilt by association!

No no -- that's not guilt by association. That's just demonstrating bias.

KaponoFor3: Rev.K: Damn right subby! Krugman is only a Nobel-prize winning economist and a centenary professor at the prestigious London School of Economics.

Ooh, ooh I know this argument trick! Appeal to authority!

Umm, the fallacy is appeal to unqualified authority. Krugman is anything but.

Neeek: Umm, the fallacy is appeal to unqualified authority. Krugman is anything but

Wikipedia, the world's highest authority, disagrees

Wow, there's a lot of shrieking and flying poo in this thread already.

One of my clients was yelling this morning that Limbaugh and Glenn Beck told us that Obama was going to wreck the economy, and now he has gone and done it. the lady is a farking idiot. Scary thing, she is a financial adviser.

KaponoFor3: Let me also say I am SHOCKED that Krugman supports Obama's budget. He's been on Obama's side since day 1 of the campaign it seems.

He's actually critical of the stimulus. Krugman is much more liberal than Obama is.

DamnYankees: He's actually critical of the stimulus. Krugman is much more liberal than Obama is

Critical of the stimulus in that he didn't think it spent/went far enough?

KaponoFor3: DamnYankees: He's actually critical of the stimulus. Krugman is much more liberal than Obama is

Critical of the stimulus in that he didn't think it spent/went far enough?

Correct.

DamnYankees: Correct.

Then I'm doubly not surprised that he likes Obama's budget because it is sick in its enormity.

KaponoFor3: DamnYankees: Correct.

Then I'm doubly not surprised that he likes Obama's budget because it is sick in its enormity.

It a good sized budget. Relative to GDP, it's a pretty average sized. Nothing special in comparison to the world.

NOT AN "APPEAL TO AUTHORITY" FALLACY: "I trust what Krugman says because he is a respected, Nobel-winning economist. As a rule of thumb, I believe what he has to say. It would take strong contrary evidence for me not to take him at his word."

"APPEAL TO AUTHORITY" FALLACY: "Because Krugman is a respected, Nobel-winning economist, he must be right and any evidence to the contrary must be in error."

"APPEAL TO AUTHORITY" FALLACY FALLACY: "If you reference a respected, Nobel-winning economist in your argument, you're making an 'appeal to authority' fallacy."

BKITU: NOT AN "APPEAL TO AUTHORITY" FALLACY: "I trust what Krugman says because he is a respected, Nobel-winning economist. As a rule of thumb, I believe what he has to say. It would take strong contrary evidence for me not to take him at his word."

"APPEAL TO AUTHORITY" FALLACY: "Because Krugman is a respected, Nobel-winning economist, he must be right and any evidence to the contrary must be in error."

"APPEAL TO AUTHORITY" FALLACY FALLACY: "If you reference a respected, Nobel-winning economist in your argument, you're making an 'appeal to authority' fallacy."

LOL. This.

Also, I thought Appeal to (false) Authority went something like this:

"Krugman has a PhD and Nobel in Economics. Therefore, his opinion of the Watchmen movie is correct."

Why should I be afraid? He's a little midget. I could beat him up easy.

Krugman often knows what he's talking about.

ricewater_stool: Yeah, Krugman was only warning about the impending housing bubble collapsing in 2002, although almost everyone ignored him. He's an idiot.

/sarcasm

What's interesting is what specifically he was saying. got an averarching general idea mostly right but missed the meat of the matter. That being the credit market. He gets a C for effort.

But truthfully, he was saying the housing market would fail since early 2001 IIRC.

KaponoFor3 [TotalFark] Quote 2009-02-27 02:38:16 PM
Rev.K: Damn right subby! Krugman is only a Nobel-prize winning economist and a centenary professor at the prestigious London School of Economics.

Ooh, ooh I know this argument trick! Appeal to authority! Credentials

FTFY

BKITU: NOT AN "APPEAL TO AUTHORITY" FALLACY: "I trust what Krugman says because he is a respected, Nobel-winning economist. As a rule of thumb, I believe what he has to say. It would take strong contrary evidence for me not to take him at his word."

"APPEAL TO AUTHORITY" FALLACY: "Because Krugman is a respected, Nobel-winning economist, he must be right and any evidence to the contrary must be in error."

"APPEAL TO AUTHORITY" FALLACY FALLACY: "If you reference a respected, Nobel-winning economist in your argument, you're making an 'appeal to authority' fallacy."

Thank you. Seriously, not enough people truly understand this.

KaponoFor3: Let me also say I am SHOCKED that Krugman supports Obama's budget. He's been on Obama's side since day 1 of the campaign it seems.

If you think that, you haven't been paying attention.

KaponoFor3: Rev.K: Damn right subby! Krugman is only a Nobel-prize winning economist and a centenary professor at the prestigious London School of Economics.

Ooh, ooh I know this argument trick! Appeal to authority!

I guess we should only value the opinions of unqualified jackasses on talk radio.

KaponoFor3: Let me also say I am SHOCKED that Krugman supports Obama's budget. He's been on Obama's side since day 1 of the campaign it seems.

he's actually been pretty critical of the stimulus package.

12349876: Why should I be afraid? He's a little midget. I could beat him up easy.

They prefer to be called "little people."

Somebody got a sore bum in here?

yea, the bush lack of a budget was so much better.



lol. Farked!

BKITU: NOT AN "APPEAL TO AUTHORITY" FALLACY: "I trust what Krugman says because he is a respected, Nobel-winning economist. As a rule of thumb, I believe what he has to say. It would take strong contrary evidence for me not to take him at his word."

"APPEAL TO AUTHORITY" FALLACY: "Because Krugman is a respected, Nobel-winning economist, he must be right and any evidence to the contrary must be in error."

"APPEAL TO AUTHORITY" FALLACY FALLACY: "If you reference a respected, Nobel-winning economist in your argument, you're making an 'appeal to authority' fallacy."

Yeah everytime people start screaming "appeal to Authority" I ask if they go to a mechanic when they get sick instead of a doctor because going to a doctor would be an "appeal to Authority" according to them.

"Appeal to Authority" just means just because he is an expert doesn't mean he is always right, but it doesn't mean his view has the same value as everyone else. Those are too different things.

Mrbogey: But truthfully, he was saying the housing market would fail since early 2001 IIRC.

Like other economists that have predicted ten out of the past three recessions, sooner or later they're right. The housing market didn't begin to crash and burn in my area until Feb.08 and has recovered half of it's loss already. If the brakes had been put on in 2001 millions of people never would have been able to buy.

And remember the Republicans said all these same things on Clinton's first budget too.

They said he was being fiscal irresponsible with his budget.


Basically with the Republican's track record I am more frightened when they agree with Obama then when they disagree.

KaponoFor3: DamnYankees: Correct.

Then I'm doubly not surprised that he likes Obama's budget because it is sick in its enormity.

I was surprised that Krugman approved it, I was thinking he would be against it because it wasn't big enough.

KaponoFor3: DamnYankees: Correct.

Then I'm doubly not surprised that he likes Obama's budget because it is sick in its enormity.

Your original statement tried to paint Krugman as an Obama fanboy who approves of everything he does. Regardless of whether he attacked the stimulus from the left or the right, he was certainly an outspoken critic of it and not a mindless follower.

Plus, he was strongly in Hillary's corner during the primaries.

Let me just say:

Bush budget sucked.
Obama stimulus X 2.
Both crippling our economy.

Bladel: Also, I thought Appeal to (false) Authority went something like this:

"Krugman has a PhD and Nobel in Economics. Therefore, his opinion of the Watchmen movie is correct."

Pretty much this.

attackingpencil: Thank you. Seriously, not enough people truly understand this.

Well, for many people, it's convenient not understand it, therefore they won't ever understand it. In fact, it's generally convenient not to understand anything for them, which is why they are such ignorant fscktards. They're called "Republicans."

What the hell does this douchenozzle know. He only won one of those liberal elitest Nobel Prize's for his work in economics.

We all know economics pertains crap you have to learn in 11/12th grade and you forget all about for the rest of your life.

What if we end up running twin deficits for years to come? Krugman seems to quickly assume this will not happen... He seems a bit too optimistic thinking recovery from this financial mess will be easy.

Just to throw some more wood in the fire, what if our fiscal obligations begin to grow? If money supply begins to expand, this IS inevitable. I believe this will be the scary part.

//not impressed

Obviously: Let me just say:

Bush budget sucked.
Obama stimulus X 2.
Both crippling our economy.

One was during an economic boom the other was during an economic bust. When you try to ride a boom as high as possible it makes the bust worse.

Paul Krugman's ideas on economics don't match what Rush Limbaugh says. Therefore Krugman is wrong.

Rev.K: Damn right subby! Krugman is only a Nobel-prize winning economist and a centenary professor at the prestigious London School of Economics.

Friedman and Hayek also won the Nobel prize in economics. Regarding public policy, those two and Krugman disagree sufficiently so that 'having a Nobel prize == correct' is clearly untrue. Rather amusingly, Hayek also served at the London School of Economics. For that matter, Scholes and Merton also won a Nobel Prize; that doesn't necessarily mean that their policies were optimal in practice, either (see LTCM).

Rickmansworth ...
Just to throw some more wood in the fire, what if our fiscal obligations begin to grow? If money supply begins to expand, this IS inevitable. I believe this will be the scary part.

Obama's already set aside over half a trillion dollars from this year's budget for free healthcare. He'll roll that forward to 2012 so the budget deficit doesn't look so horrible in an election year. Book it.

I'm not sure if Krugman's grandkids will be too thrilled with Obama's new budget.

Rickmansworth: Just to throw some more wood in the fire, what if our fiscal obligations begin to grow? If money supply begins to expand, this IS inevitable. I believe this will be the scary part.

That probably depends upon how well the rest of the world is doing. If investors are still sufficiently terrified that they'd continue loaning money to the Feds even at a low rate because other options look unsafe, perhaps it wouldn't be too ugly.

We'd probably raise taxes substantially higher (Pres. Obama's target of choice appears to be couples making $250K + / singles making $200K, although whether that's gross, AGI, or MAGI is usually not specified) before we let the dollar swap places with the Zimbabwean notes.