tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post6436006471291440444..comments2024-03-27T05:23:48.855-04:00Comments on Krugman-in-Wonderland: Krugman Strikes OutWilliam L. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01802990642236807359noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-44871892261988255172010-03-24T11:22:53.831-04:002010-03-24T11:22:53.831-04:00Chris, offer some insight of worth or shut up.Chris, offer some insight of worth or shut up.Inquisitorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04045556736757584100noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-91048157679047727592010-03-23T20:58:30.383-04:002010-03-23T20:58:30.383-04:00Let's Get this right. Taxes begin immediately ...Let's Get this right. Taxes begin immediately but Healthcare Coverage for most doesn't start for four years. Then Health Care coverage is not define. It is like paying for a car insurance policy now, but coverage doesn't begin until four years and you don't know what repairs are covered or if the repairman has a waiting list?<br /><br />It doesn't matter anyway. Like the California Legislature that declares the budget solved, it will be back again trying to plug the holes. Our debt will destroy this plan. We don't have the money.Marco2006https://www.blogger.com/profile/01235104902243866449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-91100532181958254032010-03-23T15:38:23.804-04:002010-03-23T15:38:23.804-04:00Wow. This blog is creepy. You need to see somebody...Wow. This blog is creepy. You need to see somebody and get some real help. It looks like you and 100 other whackjobs.<br /><br />You made one good point: Gingrich is loathsome.<br /><br />Congratulations on being a creep. <br /><br />Sorry that you and your buddies lost on Sunday. Obama really has your # !!!!CK Spadehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12374355651115136282noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-27014115566531170942010-03-23T13:28:39.728-04:002010-03-23T13:28:39.728-04:00Wow mickeyB, you sure tore Bill a new one with all...Wow mickeyB, you sure tore Bill a new one with all those examples.<br /><br />Anyway, do you think The Krugman believes that arguments against Marxist and Keynesian policies are based on racism? Or just when Obama's policies are based on those originated by Marx and Keynes? Since Obama's policies are not original ideas and people have pointed out the folly of Marxist/Keynesian ideas since before he was born, how can this opposition now all of sudden become racist?<br /><br />The desperate socialists have lost the intellectual battle over the past 100+ years and now must resort to white guys pulling the race card. How much lower can The Krugman sink?Mark Davishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06581482336684674658noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-7888270833082332222010-03-23T00:57:23.291-04:002010-03-23T00:57:23.291-04:00Your entire response to krugman is completely divo...Your entire response to krugman is completely divorced from reality.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17528749882057037103noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-31972955879703162452010-03-22T12:20:08.311-04:002010-03-22T12:20:08.311-04:00I'm not sure myself, although the Vietnam War ...I'm not sure myself, although the Vietnam War really did split the Democrats. I saw the Democratic National Convention in 1968, and it was outright war! Had George Wallace not run as a third-party candidate, Nixon would have won in 1968 in a landslide.<br /><br />That being said, I don't have any time for Gingrich and consider him to be a loathsome character.William L. Andersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802990642236807359noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-43093452100879190262010-03-22T12:06:19.061-04:002010-03-22T12:06:19.061-04:00"However, after quoting Obama, he then turns ..."However, after quoting Obama, he then turns to Newt Gingrich:<br /><br /> And on the other side, here’s what Newt Gingrich, the Republican former speaker of the House — a man celebrated by many in his party as an intellectual leader — had to say: If Democrats pass health reform, “They will have destroyed their party much as Lyndon Johnson shattered the Democratic Party for 40 years” by passing civil rights legislation.<br /><br />Notice that "passing civil rights legislation" was not what Gingrich said. No, Krugman inserted those words to imply that anyone who opposed the legislation was a racist.<br />______________________________________<br />What did Johnson do to shatter the Democratic Party that Gingrich was referring to?Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06504789395044853563noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-26878642749595922562010-03-22T11:04:53.792-04:002010-03-22T11:04:53.792-04:00Yes, now that Krugman has turned into a vicious pa...Yes, now that Krugman has turned into a vicious partisan, suddenly the application of real economic theory is an act of vicious racism. Yes, whatever the CBO declares trumps the Law of Scarcity. How convenient.William L. Andersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802990642236807359noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-26302524243693859532010-03-22T10:32:10.290-04:002010-03-22T10:32:10.290-04:00It is often noted that Krugman is more of a politi...It is often noted that Krugman is more of a politician than an Economist. I found this interesting, from the Wikipedia page of the ultimate economist-disguised politician, John Kenneth Galbraith; from the criticism section (note the last sentence):<br />“Paul Krugman, the influential, Nobel Prize–winning Princeton University professor and New York Times op-ed columnist, has denigrated Galbraith’s stature as an economist. In Peddling Prosperity: Economic Sense and Nonsense in an Age of Diminished Expectations, he calls Galbraith a “policy entrepreneur” – an economist who writes solely for the public, as opposed to one who writes for other professors, and who therefore makes unwarranted diagnoses and offers over-simplistic answers to complex economic problems. He asserts that Galbraith was never taken seriously by fellow academics, who viewed him as more of a “media personality”. For example, Krugman believes that Galbraith’s work The New Industrial State is not considered to be “real economic theory”, and that Economics in Perspective is “remarkably ill-informed”.[36] However, acknowledging the alleged damage caused by the George W. Bush administration, Krugman now says of his polemics in the 1990s, “I was wrong obviously. If I’d understood where politics would be now, it would have been quite different.”Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12632853986166127995noreply@blogger.com