If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   I'm just saying, are we sure Paul Krugman *doesn't* have an arctic base and a genetically-engineered pet lynx?   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 199
    More: Amusing, Paul Krugman  
•       •       •

4520 clicks; posted to Politics » on 15 Aug 2011 at 7:07 PM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



199 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2011-08-15 04:09:39 PM  
I had the same thought, although in my version, it was more like Galactus than ID4.
 
2011-08-15 04:30:17 PM  
That reminds me, I must finish reading Yellow Blue Tibia some day.

It's a SF story about a group of Russian SF writers who are ordered by Stalin, a major SF fan, to come up with a fake alien invasion to fool the Americans (among others).

Nothing comes of the scheme until decades later when suddenly events start to suspiciously reflect the top secret scenario drawn up by the (mostly dead) SF writers.

Review of the novel: http://www.sfsite.com/07b/yb324.htm

The idea of a "fake invasion" to unite factions and parties is a "set piece" of political imagination. Except in cases where "real" enemies are manufactured (to justify invading your creditors and "paying off" your debts with violence, for example) by real politicians, it's basically a thought experiment which asks the obvious question: Is this stuff really as important as we are making it out to be? Shouldn't we be cooperating instead of over-blowing every little jot and tittle of the negotiations or the size and importance of every little crisis? Isn't most politics and journalism complete and utter fark?

I'm not sure exactly how this relates, but today I read a brief note in the Financial Times about an article that was published by Le Monde of Paris which compared the current political situation in France to the eve of the French Revolution. The main point was that the French debt is now 80% or so of GDP, as it was in 1788, just before the King made the fatal mistake of calling the Estates General together to get money to pay the debt down.

It's not just the French, of course, who are talking of their historical revolution under conditions (debt, debt, debt) similar to the conditions which provoked the Revolution.

In the US, many people are alluding or directly referencing the "no taxation without representation" chatter of the governing classes in the colonies, adding their own "no taxation even with representation" to the mix.

The temptation to repudiate debt for goods and services already received faces every American, where Chapter 11 makes defaulting on your debts easy and fun for the whole family, provided they've wisely sheltered their assets against seizure and liquidation.

Personally, I say go with the alien invasion. Blowing up a lot of excess to need real estate will solve the housing market problem by increasing the real value of surviving housing. Blowing up a lot of Republicans might even convince them not to try to make the Civil War best two of three.

Remember, in the event that aliens fail to invade and worse comes to worse, that we're all in this together, and that Canada is rooting for you. Naturally, we will be providing cannon fodder to both sides at levels largely in excess of your loses in most of your modern wars, just like we did last time. We've got a big stake in your economy and we will be there to protect it.

Should we bring the Hessians, British and the French or will this be a replay of the Civil War? You might want to invite China and the European Community. One way or another your foolishness and wickedness is going to involve all of humanity, so you might as well give them their fair share of the muddy fishing waters before they decide to take it on terms of their own devising.

In the event of an alien invasion, we expect you'll be fighting all by yourselves, just like in the movies*. Lots of luck!

*Except in the right wing movies where a motley crew of right wing misfits and morons come together to fight the enemy their government and corporations failed to fight, while leading the poor but well-meaning simps of the Rest of the World(TM) to a suspiciously easy victory over massively superior forces. (I guess that's sort of like the American Exceptionalist Version of the Revolutionary War rather than the Civil War, but let's not nit-pick--all wars are one war.)

I want to fight aliens. Despite being millions of years more advanced then us, you can take the feckers down with weapons scarcely more advanced than those available to medieval peasants: sticks, rocks, cannons, plague, fire, polluted water, and of course, whatever you can steal from their dead cold fingers or pseudo-pods.

I expect my books will be a terrible weapon against aliens. I will open them, point to a page, and then slam their alien appendages in them and hope it's their genitals and not their noses or their ears. From what I've seen of movies, this should work just fine.
 
2011-08-15 04:46:08 PM  
Oh, by the way. If Paul Krugman needs a sub-Arctic base and a regular Canadian lynx to save the economy, it can be arranged.

Yes, yes, the Fortress of Solitude is lovely, but Norbini has been living in it for years and it really needs a good house-cleaning, maybe an airing for a few weeks provided the polar bears can be kept at bay. How about a fishing camp that was once rented to Nassim Nicolas Taleb, author of The Black Swan?

By the way, I expect the current economic crisis to last another four years or so. And then blow up into something really stupid and catastrophic, like World War III.

I am not accepting the neo-con claim to have already fought and won World War III (and possibly World Wars IV and V).

To win a war, you have to at least fight the enemy, dammit.

Two books I recommend from my Kindle:

A short essay on The Great Stagnation by economist, Tyler Cowen, and The Flaw of Averages by Sam L. Savage, a statistician, but don't let that scare you.

Combined with, say, Merchants of Doubt by Naomi Oreskes and Tim Conway and On Bullshiat by Harry G. Frankfurt, these easy works will tell you why government, business and science so frequently fail because of simple but catastrophic flaws in the way humans think. If you want something right wing to throw in the mix, try Among the Truthers by Jonathan Kay. It's probably the most sensible right wing book to come out of America since 1930.
 
2011-08-15 04:51:14 PM  
Please. Where's Krugman going to get a giant psychic squid? In this economy? At this time of day?
 
2011-08-15 04:53:47 PM  

brantgoose: That reminds me, I must finish reading Yellow Blue Tibia some day


Can I subscribe to your newsletter?
 
2011-08-15 04:54:44 PM  

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Please. Where's Krugman going to get a giant psychic squid? In this economy? At this time of day?


*shifty eyes*
 
2011-08-15 04:58:36 PM  
Since conspiracy theorists can't take a joke, we're going to see things like "Next on Alex Jones, the Elites actually planned a false flag alien attack to make billionaires richer!"
 
2011-08-15 05:04:38 PM  
It wasn't so much a joke as he was making an analogy to support his opinion that the answer is for the gov't to borrow and spend trillions more right now and everything will be fine in 18months. Krugman has been saying this for a long time and it's still not a bright idea.
 
2011-08-15 05:08:20 PM  

MeinRS6: It wasn't so much a joke as he was making an analogy to support his opinion that the answer is for the gov't to borrow and spend trillions more right now and everything will be fine in 18months. Krugman has been saying this for a long time and it's still not a bright idea.


How did the Great Depression finally end, again?
 
2011-08-15 05:20:44 PM  
repeat from last week, no?
 
2011-08-15 05:27:53 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: How did the Great Depression finally end, again?


Between 62 and 78 million people (mostly non-Americans) were shot, stabbed, blown up, incinerated, nuked, gassed, vivisected, or simply died from disease, cold, or starvation. But hey, we got full employment and some kick-ass propaganda, so there's that...
 
2011-08-15 05:28:10 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: MeinRS6: It wasn't so much a joke as he was making an analogy to support his opinion that the answer is for the gov't to borrow and spend trillions more right now and everything will be fine in 18months. Krugman has been saying this for a long time and it's still not a bright idea.

How did the Great Depression finally end, again?


Serotonin re-uptake inhibitors?
 
2011-08-15 06:00:47 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: MeinRS6: It wasn't so much a joke as he was making an analogy to support his opinion that the answer is for the gov't to borrow and spend trillions more right now and everything will be fine in 18months. Krugman has been saying this for a long time and it's still not a bright idea.

How did the Great Depression finally end, again?


By Obama's dad instructing the masses on the greatness of communism?
 
2011-08-15 06:04:46 PM  
Paul Krugman.. Ozymandias.. 'smartest man on Earth'.. OMG it fits!!!
 
2011-08-15 06:05:28 PM  
Kudos, Subby. That's the best headline I've read in a long while. Nicely played.
 
2011-08-15 06:05:45 PM  
We're in a lot of trouble if Krugman is the smartest man on earth.
 
2011-08-15 06:20:47 PM  

MeinRS6: We're in a lot of trouble if Krugman is the smartest man on earth.


correct me if i'm wrong, but don't you spend a lot of time on here telling us all how much trouble we are all in now (typically due, in your analysis, to the actions of the democrats)? if you believe we are in a lot of trouble, don't you therefore also agree that krugman is the smartest man on earth?

i look forward to hearing your support for further stimulus funding.
 
2011-08-15 06:27:00 PM  
If the present military-industrial complex isn't cutting it as far as jobs and manufacturing is concerned, then I'm sorry because it should be a hell of a lot smaller.

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Please. Where's Krugman going to get a giant psychic squid? In this economy? At this time of day?


He only saw the movie.
 
2011-08-15 06:31:40 PM  

thomps: MeinRS6: We're in a lot of trouble if Krugman is the smartest man on earth.

correct me if i'm wrong, but don't you spend a lot of time on here telling us all how much trouble we are all in now (typically due, in your analysis, to the actions of the democrats)? if you believe we are in a lot of trouble, don't you therefore also agree that krugman is the smartest man on earth?

i look forward to hearing your support for further stimulus funding.


The who's in the what when?
 
2011-08-15 07:13:59 PM  
Remember all good cons "know" that teaching at one of the worlds top universities is a sure sign you know nothing about your area of study.

If you want to consult with a real expert you turn to a junior college drop out on hate. radio.
 
2011-08-15 07:17:26 PM  

MasterThief: cameroncrazy1984: How did the Great Depression finally end, again?

Between 62 and 78 million people (mostly non-Americans) were shot, stabbed, blown up, incinerated, nuked, gassed, vivisected, or simply died from disease, cold, or starvation.


The recovery from the Depression started well before 1939.
 
2011-08-15 07:17:49 PM  

MeinRS6: thomps: MeinRS6: We're in a lot of trouble if Krugman is the smartest man on earth.

correct me if i'm wrong, but don't you spend a lot of time on here telling us all how much trouble we are all in now (typically due, in your analysis, to the actions of the democrats)? if you believe we are in a lot of trouble, don't you therefore also agree that krugman is the smartest man on earth?

i look forward to hearing your support for further stimulus funding.

The who's in the what when?


Thomps is making a classic mistake of confusing necessity and sufficiency.

You posited the following relationship:

IF (Krugman Smartest) ===> THEN (Lot'o'Trouble)

Thomps was pointing out that you believe (Lot'o'Trouble) to be true. He promptly and erroneously concluded that you must also believe (Krugman Smartest) was also true. That is, he made the classic mistake of Affirming the Consequent.

However, that doesn't follow. You can certainly believe (Lot'o'Trouble) to be true and then have any belief you like about Krugman.

By way of analogy, a similar logical relationship would be:

IF (In California) ==> THEN (In USA)

In this case, it's fairly obvious that you can be (In USA) and then you may or may not be (In California). The Krugman example follows the same logical form.
 
2011-08-15 07:18:15 PM  
hurm
 
2011-08-15 07:20:10 PM  
Who needs a fake fake war when we already have plenty of real fake wars. We just need to spend even more money on them.
 
2011-08-15 07:28:35 PM  
Krugman was a guest on CNN's "Fareed Zakaria GPS" on Sunday. Speaking with Zakaria and Harvard economist Ken Rogoff, he made the same case he has been making for years--that deficits are not the top economic concern of the day.

I asked this in another thread and the only person who responded was someone on the same side of the argument as I:

What are the benefits of having a balanced budget in the immediate future?
 
2011-08-15 07:32:47 PM  
Aliens probably don't have a use for cash, or for that matter economists, so...
 
2011-08-15 07:35:34 PM  

Car_Ramrod: Krugman was a guest on CNN's "Fareed Zakaria GPS" on Sunday. Speaking with Zakaria and Harvard economist Ken Rogoff, he made the same case he has been making for years--that deficits are not the top economic concern of the day.

I asked this in another thread and the only person who responded was someone on the same side of the argument as I:

What are the benefits of having a balanced budget in the immediate future?


Shhhhh.

Don't mess with their anti-deficit paradigm. They have truthiness on their side.
 
2011-08-15 07:35:37 PM  

Car_Ramrod: What are the benefits of having a balanced budget in the immediate future?


The biggest benefit is we get to take away handouts from brown people.
 
2011-08-15 07:40:17 PM  
Weaver95's journal
August 15, 2011

Dog carcass in alley this morning, tire tread on burst stomach. The politics tab is afraid of me. I have seen its true face. The streets are extended gutters and the gutters are full of blood and when the drains finally scab over, all the vermin will drown. The accumulated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the whores and politicians will look up and shout "Save us!"... and I'll look down and whisper "No."
 
2011-08-15 07:41:30 PM  
As a financial advisor, I tend to read books about economics from whatever source I can. I don't care about the politics, I just want to get a feel for the world and where the markets are heading.

That being said, I'm actually reading an old book written by Krugman right now. It's called 'The Great Unraveling' from 2003 or so. No idea where it came from, and I thought it would be way out of date. Unfortunately, I was wrong. It's not like Krugman had a crystal ball, so it's not exactly on... but way to many things he's said in the first couple hundred pages happened.

Like I said, I want the clients to be safe... so I tend to pay attention when Krugman talks.
 
2011-08-15 07:41:53 PM  
Weaver95

"Writing really helps organize my thoughts."
 
2011-08-15 07:42:47 PM  

bootman: Car_Ramrod: What are the benefits of having a balanced budget in the immediate future?

The biggest benefit is we get to take away handouts from brown people.


Right. Because math and economics are racist.
 
2011-08-15 07:42:47 PM  

bootman: The biggest benefit is we get to take away handouts from brown people.


Anything to get rid of Snooki...
 
2011-08-15 07:43:50 PM  
The deficit is not the biggest problem of the day.
Oh my god someone who actually has a brain!
 
2011-08-15 07:43:54 PM  

Car_Ramrod: Weaver95

"Writing really helps organize my thoughts."


Ugh, ignore that, wrong thread for that theme. Lameboat.
 
2011-08-15 07:44:41 PM  

Car_Ramrod: Krugman was a guest on CNN's "Fareed Zakaria GPS" on Sunday. Speaking with Zakaria and Harvard economist Ken Rogoff, he made the same case he has been making for years--that deficits are not the top economic concern of the day.

I asked this in another thread and the only person who responded was someone on the same side of the argument as I:

What are the benefits of having a balanced budget in the immediate future?


well it is the other side of the keynesian coin - if krugman truly believes that stimulus spending in bad times is the answer to recessions and liquidity traps, then he needs to become a proponent of spending cuts and tax increases once the economy rights itself. however, i don't think anyone is willing to argue that this economy is in as strong enough position to support that shift in spending/tax policy.

Weaver95: Weaver95's journal


oh come on weaver, you were doing so well. put the costume back in the attic.
 
2011-08-15 07:47:14 PM  

thomps: Car_Ramrod: Krugman was a guest on CNN's "Fareed Zakaria GPS" on Sunday. Speaking with Zakaria and Harvard economist Ken Rogoff, he made the same case he has been making for years--that deficits are not the top economic concern of the day.

I asked this in another thread and the only person who responded was someone on the same side of the argument as I:

What are the benefits of having a balanced budget in the immediate future?

well it is the other side of the keynesian coin - if krugman truly believes that stimulus spending in bad times is the answer to recessions and liquidity traps, then he needs to become a proponent of spending cuts and tax increases once the economy rights itself. however, i don't think anyone is willing to argue that this economy is in as strong enough position to support that shift in spending/tax policy.


Right, I understand the benefits of a balanced budget in the long run, and that it needs to happen when/if times are good again. I'm talking about at this particular moment in history, in our economic situation, why would balancing the budget be a good thing for our economy in the immediate future?
 
2011-08-15 07:47:53 PM  

MeinRS6: bootman: Car_Ramrod: What are the benefits of having a balanced budget in the immediate future?

The biggest benefit is we get to take away handouts from brown people.

Right. Because math and economics are racist.


Can you use some of that math and economics to answer my question, please?
 
2011-08-15 07:51:00 PM  

Car_Ramrod: Right, I understand the benefits of a balanced budget in the long run, and that it needs to happen when/if times are good again. I'm talking about at this particular moment in history, in our economic situation, why would balancing the budget be a good thing for our economy in the immediate future?


because if libruls like stimulus spending, the real solution must be reverse-stimulus spending cuts. the world is binary.
 
2011-08-15 07:53:21 PM  
Party like it's 1946!
 
2011-08-15 07:54:59 PM  

MeinRS6: Right. Because math and economics are racist.


The math comes from an economics theory. There are many different theories. Not everyone subscribes to the theory that incessantly fellating the wealthy is always the best way to go.

Do me one favor. Can you explain why a country with higher taxes and even *ASSET* taxes have a higher rates of entrepreneurship than my beloved US of A? (Source: http://ukhamba.web.officelive.com/WealthiestandProsperousCountries.aspx)
 
2011-08-15 08:05:18 PM  

Car_Ramrod: MeinRS6: bootman: Car_Ramrod: What are the benefits of having a balanced budget in the immediate future?

The biggest benefit is we get to take away handouts from brown people.

Right. Because math and economics are racist.

Can you use some of that math and economics to answer my question, please?


If we balance the budget we will stop increasing the debt. In fact, we could find ourselves in a position of being able to start paying down the debt. So from an economic perspective, would you rather have $20trillion in debt or $1trillion? If you answered $1trillion, then the first step is to balance the budget.
 
2011-08-15 08:06:09 PM  

SunsetLament: I love how this liberal genius is basically admitting it was WW2 (and not the New Deal) that got us out of the Great Depression.


This just in: there can be multiple causes for any given event. More at 11.

Krugman noted that the effort of World War II helped end the Great Depression
 
2011-08-15 08:07:10 PM  

MasterThief: cameroncrazy1984: How did the Great Depression finally end, again?

Between 62 and 78 million people (mostly non-Americans) were shot, stabbed, blown up, incinerated, nuked, gassed, vivisected, or simply died from disease, cold, or starvation. But hey, we got full employment and some kick-ass propaganda, so there's that...


War also brings huge advancements in medicine and technology.
 
2011-08-15 08:07:20 PM  

SunsetLament: I love how this liberal genius is basically admitting it was WW2 (and not the New Deal) that got us out of the Great Depression.


It was the protracted investment in human capital. It was the skills gained by the populace while they worked and later improved upon by the GO Bill.
 
2011-08-15 08:08:54 PM  

bootman: SunsetLament: I love how this liberal genius is basically admitting it was WW2 (and not the New Deal) that got us out of the Great Depression.

It was the protracted investment in human capital. It was the skills gained by the populace while they worked and later improved upon by the GO Bill.


Err, GI Bill...
 
2011-08-15 08:11:44 PM  

bootman: MeinRS6: Right. Because math and economics are racist.

The math comes from an economics theory. There are many different theories. Not everyone subscribes to the theory that incessantly fellating the wealthy is always the best way to go.

Do me one favor. Can you explain why a country with higher taxes and even *ASSET* taxes have a higher rates of entrepreneurship than my beloved US of A? (Source: http://ukhamba.web.officelive.com/WealthiestandProsperousCountries.aspx)



Much better source, in fact it is one long lefty wank fest:

http://www.inc.com/magazine/20110201/in-norway-start-ups-say-ja-to-socialism_Pr i nter_Friendly.html
 
2011-08-15 08:12:29 PM  
Krugman is probably sitting around wondering where is Glenn Beck when we really need them.
 
2011-08-15 08:13:12 PM  

MeinRS6: So from an economic perspective, would you rather have $20trillion in debt or $1trillion? If you answered $1trillion, then the first step is to balance the budget.


ok now explain why debt-load should be the single data point used to manage the economy.
 
2011-08-15 08:13:24 PM  
Obama has already tried a version of this and failed.

Remember that we have all these green jobs and green initiatives to stop that evil ol' global warming from killing us all.
 
Displayed 50 of 199 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report