tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post8510516648731489764..comments2024-03-27T05:23:48.855-04:00Comments on Krugman-in-Wonderland: The Big ShillWilliam L. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01802990642236807359noreply@blogger.comBlogger25125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-73319787262642584832013-02-01T15:07:04.674-05:002013-02-01T15:07:04.674-05:00BARCLAYS
Registered No – 1026167
Registered offic...BARCLAYS<br />Registered No – 1026167 <br />Registered office <br />1 Churchill Place, <br />London E14 5HP. <br />barclaysloan@admin.in.th<br /><br />Barclays is a trading name of Barclays Bank PLC and its subsidiaries. Barclays Bank PLC is registered in England and authorized and regulated by the Financial Services Authority (FSA No. 122702). We’re one of the largest financial services providers in the world, Also we engage in reAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-34593841186438988752013-02-01T00:38:23.963-05:002013-02-01T00:38:23.963-05:00I am searching for my assignment and found your bl...I am searching for my assignment and found your blog post ( The Big Shill ) on google search your post is informative an give me lots knowledge for my current assignment thanks for sharing such a wonderful information keep updating share the knowledge whole world including me.academic dissertationhttp://www.academic-dissertation.co.uk/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-9360022362665464322013-01-23T15:06:23.155-05:002013-01-23T15:06:23.155-05:00Keynesians like to claim that free markets are &qu...Keynesians like to claim that free markets are "trickle-down economics" in action, but I think a real case can be made in saying that the Keynesian stimulus truly is based upon "trickle down" theory. The idea is that the government shovels money to favored political constituencies and then individuals there spend the money.<br /><br />The new spending then "trickles" through the economy and supposedly enriching those at the back of the line.William L. Andersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802990642236807359noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-90814061011958026622013-01-23T13:39:01.171-05:002013-01-23T13:39:01.171-05:00LK said: "No, it was not. It was clearly stim...LK said: "No, it was not. It was clearly stimulative."<br /><br />Only stimulative to the banking and political class<br /><br />Mikenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-81022304442904258182013-01-23T08:53:36.185-05:002013-01-23T08:53:36.185-05:00"No, it was not. It was clearly stimulative.&..."No, it was not. It was clearly stimulative."<br /><br />As Obelix says "Clear as mud"Balanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-68446030195250572112013-01-23T04:56:39.426-05:002013-01-23T04:56:39.426-05:00 GDP measurement includes government spending and ... GDP measurement includes government spending and so stating that a decoline in government spending lead to a decline in GDP is simply a tautologyDineronoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-6329825897638336872013-01-23T01:08:49.514-05:002013-01-23T01:08:49.514-05:00"Oh, OK so whatever government does if GDP ha...<i>"Oh, OK so whatever government does if GDP happens to go down then that was "austerity""</i><br /><br />No, that is not what I said above.<br /><br /><i>"I presume the George Bush spending in 2008 followed by the Obama spending in 2009 must have also been 'austerity' "</i><br /><br />No, it was not. It was clearly stimulative.Lord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-30073123110812803602013-01-22T22:55:00.262-05:002013-01-22T22:55:00.262-05:00"Not particularly useful to policy makers is ..."Not particularly useful to policy makers is it?"<br /><br />ROFLMAO!!! Thanks, Tel.Balanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-22733646018235823462013-01-22T22:52:57.687-05:002013-01-22T22:52:57.687-05:00"although, as it happens, the law of demand i..."although, as it happens, the law of demand is certainly not universal, for other reasons"<br /><br />LK will just not stop this idiocy. He will insist on continuing to reveal his complete ignorance of basic economic concepts.Balanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-43817393087199639252013-01-22T17:16:26.522-05:002013-01-22T17:16:26.522-05:00LK: austerity is government fiscal policy (at all ...LK: <i>austerity is government fiscal policy (at all levels) that contracts demand in an economy.</i><br /><br />Oh, OK so whatever government does if GDP happens to go down then that was "austerity", that is what you are saying.<br /><br />Well, no surprise that "austerity" causes GDP to go down then, since you have just defined the cause by dint of the outcome. Not particularly useful to policy makers is it?<br /><br />I presume the George Bush spending in 2008 followed by the Obama spending in 2009 must have also been "austerity" since when the recession hit, demand was down.Telhttp://lnx-bsp.net/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-35402744545688667172013-01-22T15:39:47.948-05:002013-01-22T15:39:47.948-05:00"Tel said...
LK: The US government ran a...<i>"Tel said...<br /><br /> LK: The US government ran a deficit every year from 1931 through 1940 and beyond,"</i><br /><br />(1) it is perfectly possible for the federal government to run a deficit and at the same time for overall government fiscal policy to be contractionary.<br /><br />(2) as it happens, the federal deficit was virtually eliminated in fiscal year 1938, as Roosevelt cut <i>total federal spending</i> in both fiscal years 1937 and 1938, as you can easily verify here:<br /><br />http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/budget.php<br /><br />(3) austerity is government fiscal policy (at all levels) that contracts demand in an economy. <br /><br />When Roosevelt all but eliminated the stimulative levels of deficit spending in his budget balancing 1937-38, he severely contracted demand in the US economy. The result was real output collapse again in 1938, as you can see from the real GDP data above.Lord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-59341314005843935252013-01-22T14:55:22.306-05:002013-01-22T14:55:22.306-05:00LK: The US government ran a deficit every year fro...LK: The US government ran a deficit every year from 1931 through 1940 and beyond, so what is this "austerity"? How do you define "austerity" then?<br /><br />Telhttp://lnx-bsp.net/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-85683961949630696672013-01-22T14:20:31.244-05:002013-01-22T14:20:31.244-05:00"That is a big difference versus what Paul Da...<i>"That is a big difference versus what Paul Davidson is saying. As I read it, Davidson seems to be claiming that in the future demand curves may naturally swing upward, etc."</i><br /><br />No, Paul Davidson is not saying that at all (although, as it happens, the law of demand is certainly not universal, for other reasons).<br /><br />Davidson is thinking of certain economic data or quantities in market systems, e.g., stock market prices of an specific stock or in general 10 years from now, the returns on an investment 4 years from now, etc, etc.<br />Lord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-41978657685259583342013-01-22T14:13:32.903-05:002013-01-22T14:13:32.903-05:00Rothbard did NOT mean that the laws of economics m...Rothbard did NOT mean that the laws of economics might not apply in the future, which is what LK has been claiming. Instead, Rothbard said that we do not know the events of the future.<br /><br />However, Rothbard and the Austrians have used laws of economics to say that if the monetary authorities do such and such, in the future, we shall see results like "X." Likewise, an Austrian can say confidently that if the government slaps a price control of $2 a gallon for gasoline when the current price is $3.50 a gallon, then we will see a shortage develop.<br /><br />That is a big difference versus what Paul Davidson is saying. As I read it, Davidson seems to be claiming that in the future demand curves may naturally swing upward, etc.William L. Andersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802990642236807359noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-14575109117178500892013-01-22T13:54:54.285-05:002013-01-22T13:54:54.285-05:00Bob Roddis,
The existence of nonergodic, stochas...Bob Roddis, <br /><br />The existence of nonergodic, stochastic systems in market processes does not prevent identification of <br />output gaps <i>in the present or past</i>, or unemployment or GDP levels <i>in the present or past</i>.<br /><br />You are clearly so contemptibly ignorant - or just stupid - that you do not understand that Austrian economics has virtually the same view on uncertainty in a market system as Post Keynesian economics, e.g.:<br /><br /><i>"Mises distinguished between the role of ‘quantitative predictions’ within the natural sciences and ‘qualitative predictions’ in sociology and economics. <b>He argued that it is impossible to predict specific outcomes in social science with any degree of accuracy and that, instead, social science should concern itself only with the prediction of patterns</b>”</i><br /><br />Mark J Smith, <i>Social Science in Question: Towards a Postdisciplinary Framework</i>, p. 155.<br />----<br /><br /><i>"The important point in relation to economic theory is that Misesian Man knows the body of economic laws that Misesians have built up; these laws, while absolute, are qualitative and ceteris paribus in their nature and cannot themselves forecast the future"</i><br /><br />Murray N. Rothbard, <i>Economic Controversies</i>, p. 174.Lord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-9978256576588555762013-01-22T13:32:53.530-05:002013-01-22T13:32:53.530-05:00LK says: Paul Davidson notes the nature of uncert...LK says: Paul Davidson notes the nature of uncertainty in the Keynesian/Knightian sense:<br /><br /><i>“Keynes’s description of uncertainty matches technically what mathematical statisticians call a nonergodic stochastic system. In a nonergodic system, one can never expect whatever data set exists today to provide a reliable guide to future outcomes".</i><br /><br />Therefore, we cannot even conceive of a “trend line” and there cannot be such a thing as a “gap” because “<i>In a nonergodic system, one can never expect whatever data set exists today to provide a reliable guide to future outcomes”.</i><br /><br />http://socialdemocracy21stcentury.blogspot.com/search?q=ergodic<br /><br />Further, no one can claim that the market has failed because “<i>In a nonergodic system, one can never expect whatever data set exists today to provide a reliable guide to future outcomes”.</i>Bob Roddishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17263804608074597937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-90344717301288492172013-01-22T12:56:54.261-05:002013-01-22T12:56:54.261-05:00(1) "In other words, Krugman wants us to beli...(1) <i>"In other words, Krugman wants us to believe that <b>no U.S. "middle class" existed before the New Deal</b> "</i><br /><br />That is a ludicrous straw man, since Krugman's original statement says or implies no such thing. <br /><br />Krugman was talking about the <i>greatly expanded middle class</i> that arose after 1933 and above all after 1945.<br /><br />(2) The New Deal was a mixed bag, containing both positive and negative aspects. Even Keynes was hostile to the cartelisation and food destruction aspects, as is well known:<br /><br />http://socialdemocracy21stcentury.blogspot.com/2011/09/keynes-on-new-deal-in-1933.html<br /><br />(3) <i>"I would ask anyone to explain how Paul Krugman's theory of political economy actually demonstrates any causal relationship between New Deal and ... an overall rising standard of living. "</i><br /><br />The New Deal's moderate fiscal expansion, financial reorganisation and jobs programs allowed a clear recovery, until idiot austerity advocates convinced Roosevelt to cut and balance the budget in 1937 - and the economy plunged back into depression in 1937. <br /><br />The real GDP and real per capita figures provide the clear evidence for what austerity did in 1937-1938:<br /><br /><b>Year | GDP | Growth Rate</b><br /> 1929 | $977,000<br /> 1930 | $892,800 | -8.61%<br /> 1931 | $834,900 | -6.48%<br /> 1932 | $725,800 | -13.06%<br /> 1933 | $716,400 | -1.29%<br /> 1934 | $794,400 | 10.88%<br /> 1935 | $865,000 | 8.88%<br /> 1936 | $977,900 | 13.05%<br /> 1937 | $1,028,000 | 5.12%<br /> 1938 | $992,600 | -3.44%<br /> 1939 | $1,072,800 | 8.07%<br /> 1940 | $1,166,900 | 8.77%<br /> * Millions of 2005 dollars<br /> http://www.measuringworth.com/datasets/usgdp/result.php<br /><br />Next, real per capita GDP:<br /><br /><b>Real US Per Capita GDP 1870–2001<br /> Year | GDP | Growth rate</b><br /> 1929 | 6899 | 5.02%<br /> 1930 | 6213 | -9.94%<br /> 1931 | 5691 | -8.40%<br /> 1932 | 4908 | -13.75%<br /> 1933 | 4777 | -2.66%<br /> 1934 | 5114 | 7.05%<br /> 1935 | 5467 | 6.90%<br /> 1936 | 6204 | 13.48%<br /> 1937 | 6430 | 3.64%<br /> 1938 | 6126 | -4.72%<br /> 1939 | 6561 | 7.10%<br /> 1940 | 7010 | 6.84%<br /> (Maddison 2003: 88). <br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Lord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-68161215447014550302013-01-22T09:06:30.909-05:002013-01-22T09:06:30.909-05:00Krugman says:
"For one thing, the Big Deal’s...Krugman says:<br /><br />"For one thing, the Big Deal’s main policy initiatives are already law." <br /><br /> Yeah, that's right, rather than having a group of like-minded progressives voluntarily set up their own initiatives and thus prove to non-believers their efficacy, it's necessary to force everyone to take part, regardless of their opinions or desires. We know how easy it is to repeal a law that turns out to be a big mistake, see ethanol.<br /><br />"And there’s another contrast: the Big Deal agenda is, in fact, fairly popular — and will become more popular once Obamacare goes into effect and people see both its real benefits and the fact that it won’t send Grandma to the death panels."<br /><br />Sure, the "Big Deal agenda" is popular, at least among those that feel it will include "free" stuff. As it is now, every complaint that's made about current medical delivery will be solved by the Affordable Care Act, or so the bureaucratic optimists believe. Evidently they also believe that there is an unlimited capacity for the supply of medical services so there can never be such a thing as a "death panel".<br /><br />"Finally, progressives have the demographic and cultural wind at their backs. Right-wingers flourished for decades by exploiting racial and social divisions — but that strategy has now turned against them as we become an increasingly diverse, socially liberal nation."<br /><br />A perfect example of projection. Krugman's "progressives" have not only exploited racial and social divisions to advance their agenda but have been the main force in creating them. The means to the progressive end has been to legislate equality among the inherently different, although the Ivy League alumni elite stand above this process. Krugman's unscientific love affair with progressive political ideals doesn't include his own financial sacrifice to the greater good. He could easily afford (We need more thought on the concept of "affordability".) to hire a butler, valet, footman, etc., if not just buy the victuals for some family living on the wrong side of the Princeton, NJ tracks. Of course the progressive game plan he advocates has, through byzantine regulation of voluntary exchange between free individuals, made his hiring of a butler much more difficult than it once was. Pulverized Conceptshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14860274211446159849noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-21674735300511950082013-01-22T07:13:12.218-05:002013-01-22T07:13:12.218-05:00Professor Anderson, what's your interpretation...Professor Anderson, what's your interpretation of the Austrian school mention allusion on The Simpsons? I found it hilarious.<br /><br />http://vimeo.com/57364562Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-48450642225963774932013-01-22T03:54:34.505-05:002013-01-22T03:54:34.505-05:00No doubt, "tel" also believes that Obama...<i>No doubt, "tel" also believes that Obama has been working economic miracles.</i><br /><br />Ahhh, probably that would be "JG" who thinks that not me. My full name is Telford Tendys by the way, it's on my website. I'm not a Keynesian either.<br /><br />My post was about something else.Telhttp://lnx-bsp.net/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-7473052445030064772013-01-22T03:48:35.151-05:002013-01-22T03:48:35.151-05:00Amazing. Until Tel pronounced his great historical...Amazing. Until Tel pronounced his great historical wisdom (or whatever his name is), I had no idea that the only new regulatory initiative of the New Deal was the imposition of a few new bank regulations.<br /><br />Furthermore, I had no idea that the AAA had nothing to do with an effort to raise agricultural prices, and that the entirety of the AAA was soil conservation. (That might contradict what the New Dealers and everyone was saying at the time, but like all Keynesians, "tel" knows better.)<br /><br />As for the kosher butcher that "tel" apparently thinks was legitimately prosecuted for the criminal act of butchering chickens the way it had been done in American and in previous Jewish generations, it was the Schecter case that brought down the NRA.<br /><br />You see, even though the framers of the NIRA openly said they wanted to reorganize the U.S. economy into a series of cartels, and even though the stated goal was to limit production and push up prices, "tel" knows better. All that stuff that was on the record really was just imaginary.<br /><br />No doubt, "tel" also believes that Obama has been working economic miracles.William L. Andersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802990642236807359noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-47267395558759734562013-01-22T03:43:05.248-05:002013-01-22T03:43:05.248-05:00Austrian goes mainstream! If you can call a guest ...Austrian goes mainstream! If you can call a guest post on ZH to be mainstream (I'm thinking of the future here).<br /><br />http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-01-21/guest-post-keynesians-and-ponzians<br /><br />Sooo Prof "Hot Shot" Anderson, where's your guest post on ZH huh huh huh?<br /><br />By strange coincidence though, the article does mention <i>... the political propaganda spewed out daily from Washington, their media minions and Wall Street shills.</i><br /><br />Hmmm, dunno who he could be referring to there, no one in particular comes to mind.<br /><br />Telhttp://lnx-bsp.net/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-59126756160476650442013-01-22T01:56:15.662-05:002013-01-22T01:56:15.662-05:00Oh yes, and that part in "The Grapes of Wrath...Oh yes, and that part in "The Grapes of Wrath" where they burn all of fruit while the Joads and friends were starving and blaming it all on capitalism was pretty funny too.Bob Roddishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17263804608074597937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-78075608788433058682013-01-22T01:50:51.812-05:002013-01-22T01:50:51.812-05:00Such hyperbole indeed. Check out the "NRA-Vo...Such hyperbole indeed. Check out the "NRA-Voting Strength in the Iron and Steel Industry Code", Chapter 9 at page 13:<br /><br />http://www.voltairenet.org/IMG/pdf/Sutton_Wall_Street_and_FDR.pdfBob Roddishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17263804608074597937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-56851823033781115872013-01-21T19:12:03.034-05:002013-01-21T19:12:03.034-05:00Allow me to translate for those not fluent in your...Allow me to translate for those not fluent in your particular style of hyperbole:<br /><br />"unleashed petty bureaucrats to burden entrepreneurs with useless rules" - Translation: Required independent audits of financial statements to increase reliability of financial reporting, imposed penalties on financial fraud via the Securities Act of 1933 and actually restored depositors faith in banks through deposit insurance via the FDIC.<br /><br />"destroyed agricultural products despite widespread hunger" - Translation: Paid farmers to not farm on all of their land to prevent turning over fragile soil during a drought, which contributed to soil degradation, which was a primary contributor to the dust bowl effect. <br /><br />"criminalized the kosher killing of chickens" - Translation: There was a kosher butcher who was prosectuted for violating some aspect of a New Deal labor law and I thought I could pass this off as something sinister.<br /><br /> JGnoreply@blogger.com