tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post8794307694419530507..comments2024-03-27T05:23:48.855-04:00Comments on Krugman-in-Wonderland: Krugman Endorses Insanity (His Own Words)William L. Andersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01802990642236807359noreply@blogger.comBlogger32125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-54047997806843693972012-07-16T07:10:07.118-04:002012-07-16T07:10:07.118-04:00Dune,
Seriously, did you ever have a basic Logic...Dune,<br /><br />Seriously, did you ever have a basic Logic class in college?<br /><br />Go back to your original:<br /><br />"that state budget cuts to child protective services in my state has led to a tripling of abuse related child deaths over the past two years"<br /><br />I guess by your logic child abuse must have been rampant prior to the establishment of the Arizonia CPS. I mean when they didn't exist to address abuse issues, it must have been out of control?<br /><br />Your inability to incorporate independent causal elements is lazy or disingenuous thinking.Mike Mnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-57013457506467959242012-07-16T00:51:55.511-04:002012-07-16T00:51:55.511-04:00Here you go...AZCentral has an entire website devo...Here you go...AZCentral has an entire website devoted to the issue...page about 3/4s down and they have charts showing the increase.<br /><br />http://www.azcentral.com/news/child-abuse/<br /><br />"There is nothing obvious about it except for people who want to see it so badly that they imagine it. Once again, A happened and B happened does not mean A caused B."<br /><br />Well, to take this to its logical extreme, there should be no such thing as murder. There happens to be a strong correlation between someone getting shot in the head and them dying, but who knows maybe they died of a heart attack instead.Dunenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-63407069316581608872012-07-15T22:06:10.698-04:002012-07-15T22:06:10.698-04:00Dune,
I work for a county prosecutor's office...Dune,<br /><br />I work for a county prosecutor's office in AZ. We work directly with CPS, and we have not seen an increase or a decrease in child abuse crimes. What data are you using to support your claims? I'd love to know.<br /><br />PS. How would we know if child abuse had increased always, since you claim CPS isn't around to record it?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-78634191252162210942012-07-15T21:53:15.866-04:002012-07-15T21:53:15.866-04:00Zach,
What a wonderful discussion of entrepreneur...Zach,<br /><br />What a wonderful discussion of entrepreneurship that was!!!! I now owe you a lifetime of gratitude.Balanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-43117452728166742342012-07-15T20:51:49.677-04:002012-07-15T20:51:49.677-04:00Mr Anderson can defend himself and does so quite w...Mr Anderson can defend himself and does so quite well.<br /><br />What I find annoying on this reader response as well as the greater context of life is people who sit in the cheap seats, who have accomplished nothing, and yet become petty and throw rocks at the producers of society.<br /><br />You want to criticize or disagree? Fine. Do it with substance from a position of credibility. Otherwise you are a small minded simpleton pretending to be something you're not.<br /><br />BTW Anonymous you better learn to integrate a sense of humor in all aspects of life. Because based on what's coming you're going to need it to maintain some sanity or else you're not going to get through the reconciliation very well.Mike Mnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-55043130519038091862012-07-15T19:18:28.812-04:002012-07-15T19:18:28.812-04:00*made sorry.*made sorry.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-72020080317737879062012-07-15T19:17:42.632-04:002012-07-15T19:17:42.632-04:00sarcasm and economics do not mix well. dickish. So...sarcasm and economics do not mix well. dickish. So Zachriel disproved the 'fact', but did not disprove the point... perhaps the point was clumsily mad? seems pretty standard on this blog. does this Anderson guy actually teach? yikes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-37396515718003913232012-07-15T12:40:57.621-04:002012-07-15T12:40:57.621-04:00Hey you know what? I’ve never used the word “Ther...Hey you know what? I’ve never used the word “Thermodynamics” in any article I’ve written. I think I’ll make it the title of my next article chastising progressives. That way I’ve covered the bases with the "facts."Mike Mnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-68285328557715094122012-07-15T10:26:14.737-04:002012-07-15T10:26:14.737-04:00Mike M: You’re funny.
It's always best to st...<b>Mike M</b>: <i>You’re funny. </i><br /><br />It's always best to start with facts. <br /><br />William L. Anderson: <i>Notice a word that never appears in any of Krugman's columns; never. It is "entrepreneurship." </i><br /><br />His claim is quite clear. The word "never appears". Yet, not only does the word appear, but it's the title of the column. It's not really Anderson's fault, though. This discovery could only have been made through <a href="http://lmgtfy.com/?q=krugman+entrepreneurship&l=1" rel="nofollow">extensive research by an army of scribes</a>.Zachrielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11268229653808829377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-86072667110221567892012-07-15T10:00:38.365-04:002012-07-15T10:00:38.365-04:00Zachriel
You’re funny. So Krugman uses Entreprene...Zachriel<br />You’re funny. So Krugman uses Entrepreneurship, as defined by him in a narrow statistical manner, as a vehicle to castigate Regan. I don’t think that’s what Anderson was referring to.Mike Mnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-29393593127764673422012-07-15T09:55:23.952-04:002012-07-15T09:55:23.952-04:00Dune said
“… reagardless of the messy details…”
Th...Dune said<br />“… reagardless of the messy details…”<br />The implication in that statement is a faulty premise that is the State doesn’t extract resources from the people by force that bad things happen to people. And that if I vigorously assert the right to property by the individual that by default that must mean “I don’t care” about the less fortunate. If that implication is wrong, reject it.<br />I suspect additional study about the very essence of what property rights are would serve you well. Then you would understand better the nuances here when people raise them.Mike Mnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-82519165961793487592012-07-15T09:39:44.704-04:002012-07-15T09:39:44.704-04:00William L. Anderson: Notice a word that never appe...<b>William L. Anderson</b>: <i>Notice a word that never appears in any of Krugman's columns; never. It is "entrepreneurship." </i><br /><br />January 2008, "<a href="http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/19/entrepreneurship/" rel="nofollow">Entrepreneurship</a>" by Paul Krugman.Zachrielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11268229653808829377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-77541327750406740242012-07-15T03:19:08.378-04:002012-07-15T03:19:08.378-04:00"I also do not think its healthy to question ..."I also do not think its healthy to question a correlation with a fairly obvious explanation."<br /><br />There is nothing obvious about it except for people who want to see it so badly that they imagine it. Once again, A happened and B happened does not mean A caused B. There could be a third C causing both A and B. Unless you are ready to recognise this basic point, it is you who is wearing the ideological blinder.<br /><br />"Questioning causality ignores the fundamental question and allows you to keep your ideological blinders on."<br /><br />Assuming causality where none has been demonstrated can lead to the throwing of virgins into the volcano.<br /><br />"This inevitably means that some at-risk children will either be lost in the cracks or not reached on time"<br /><br />In a free market society, you will be free to run an establishment that takes care of these children and free to collect voluntary donations to fund the same while the donors in turn will be free to make these donations. I know thugs will find this point difficult to understand as they never put their money where their mouth is, but then there lies the problem.Balanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-59508854633793101072012-07-15T02:17:10.346-04:002012-07-15T02:17:10.346-04:00Dune, then do your accept responsibility for the m...Dune, then do your accept responsibility for the millions of dead Russians and Chinese at the hands of their very own governments? I mean if you don't agree with him on his view of individual property rights, then how much blame should you shoulder because of those deaths of innocents that occurred precisely because their property rights were violated by the State? There's a lot more blood on your hands than on Prof. Andersen's if we want to start using your logic. Oceans more.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-9782023386009797562012-07-14T21:47:45.137-04:002012-07-14T21:47:45.137-04:00Mike, his point is an ideological one with which I...Mike, his point is an ideological one with which I disagree. If your position is that it's always and only about property rights and you value that regardless of the messy details it involves...at least acknowledge the details. No need to shout me down in outrage or use the old "correlation != causation" argument.Dunenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-35730423583456757142012-07-14T20:03:40.329-04:002012-07-14T20:03:40.329-04:00Dune
Why don't you step up and address Bala&#...Dune<br /><br />Why don't you step up and address Bala's point. It's about property rights. Period. Not amount of rationalizing "fairness" or providing sob stories negates that fact.Mike Mnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-49313795143868039402012-07-14T18:27:07.793-04:002012-07-14T18:27:07.793-04:00By the way, Anderson, judging from the ferocity of...By the way, Anderson, judging from the ferocity of your response to my fairly innocuous post...I have to assume there is some deep underlying discomfort with some of the collateral damage caused by the policies you advocate.<br /><br />There's an obvious reason for this. Your ideology only allows you to be outraged when the abuse is a function of the state. Abuses on behalf of individuals seem to play little role because you have no answer for them.Dunenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-45143810318693698552012-07-14T18:16:21.307-04:002012-07-14T18:16:21.307-04:00Oh the outrage!
Bala, thanks for pointing out to ...Oh the outrage!<br /><br />Bala, thanks for pointing out to Prof. Anderson that I did not attack him directly. I do not understand his defensive attitude towards a simple question. If he advocates reducing taxes on the wealthy, he must acknowledge that it comes at the expense of programs that exist to protect the most vulnerable in our society (be it minorities, children, women). Law of opportunity costs, Anderson. This is in no way to say that Anderson advocates child abuse, but it must be a tradeoff he has accepted in order to advocate his policies.<br /><br />I also do not think its healthy to question a correlation with a fairly obvious explanation. Questioning causality ignores the fundamental question and allows you to keep your ideological blinders on. <br /><br />However, if you cut CPS caseworks and triple the caseload of existing workers, they are slower to respond to reports of child abuse. This inevitably means that some at-risk children will either be lost in the cracks or not reached on time...which is exactly what has happened in AZ.Dunenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-71115071343925756072012-07-14T13:20:57.702-04:002012-07-14T13:20:57.702-04:00Prof. Anderson,
Why are you getting worked up? He...Prof. Anderson,<br /><br />Why are you getting worked up? Here's Dune's offending statement.<br /><br />"how do you respond to the fact that state budget cuts to child protective services in my state has led to a tripling of abuse related child deaths over the past two years?"<br /><br />Here's my simple response. Dune - A occurred and B occurred does not mean that A caused B or B caused A or that the non occurrence of one would necessarily lead to the non occurrence of the other.<br /><br />You have just failed Logic 101. Typical of a retrogressive attempting to take the moral high ground by taking on a positive sounding label like "progressive".Balanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-24596055469643804052012-07-14T13:16:42.864-04:002012-07-14T13:16:42.864-04:00"Your main concern is protection of the wealt..."Your main concern is protection of the wealthiest and most fortunate among us"<br /><br />Ha Ha Ha!!! That's quite a ton of lipstick you are trying to put on the pig that is your approach. It is not protection of "the wealthiest and most fortunate among us" but protection of that institution that even makes civilisation and a voluntary exchange economy possible - the institution of property. What Prof. Anderson (and every other Austrian commenter on this board) is advocating is a social order that recognises the absolute and inviolate nature of property rights. "Progress" is not always good because what is "progress" for one man could be retrogression for another. But then how are thugs to ever recognise this?Balanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-74848441330775307012012-07-14T12:50:52.434-04:002012-07-14T12:50:52.434-04:00Excuse me, Dune. How do you know that cuts in the ...Excuse me, Dune. How do you know that cuts in the CPS budget has resulted in more children being killed? And you claim that I approve of the murder of children?<br /><br />Your personal comments toward me really are getting out of hand. Paul Krugman never permits people to attack him directly. I pretty much have let people do that to me, but like the "Alaska" guy who called me a racist, when you claim that I support child murders, you are stepping over the line.<br /><br />Yes, I think that high marginal tax rates over a period of time will discourage capital investment. So that makes me a supporter of child murders?<br /><br />And when I have I claimed that the "rich" need special treatment? Do you support the bank bailouts and the bailouts at Wall Street? I never have done that. Second, do you support the billions of dollars in "green energy" subsidies, given to people much wealthier than you or I?<br /><br />So, I will say that if you step over the line again, I will delete your comments.<br /><br />For a while, I have allowed anonymous comments and sometimes people go too far. Nonetheless, you have gone much further than any of the people you condemn.<br /><br />By the way, if you support giving CPS the huge power and latitude that it has, then would it be safe for me to say that you support the wrongful accusations and convictions of people falsely accused of child molesting? I'd tell you to check my other blog on that subject, but I'm sure you would then claim I am a child molester.William L. Andersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01802990642236807359noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-49845094579132972012-07-14T11:50:27.362-04:002012-07-14T11:50:27.362-04:00Anderson...our moral compasses must point in diffe...Anderson...our moral compasses must point in different directions. Your main concern is protection of the wealthiest and most fortunate among us while mine is for the most vulnerable. This isnt just a fuzzy progressive fantasy...how do you respond to the fact that state budget cuts to child protective services in my state has led to a tripling of abuse related child deaths over the past two years? In your world this is perfectly fine as long as the economic incentives of the 1% arent skewed.Dunenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-19786675560710180652012-07-14T10:13:45.405-04:002012-07-14T10:13:45.405-04:00"I still just do not understand this radical ..."I still just do not understand this radical rejection of the modern state and democratic politics."<br /><br />Yeah!! Some people can never understand the difference between violent and voluntary actions.Balanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-59860398450488539142012-07-14T01:52:35.789-04:002012-07-14T01:52:35.789-04:00Geez Anderson. I still just do not understand this...Geez Anderson. I still just do not understand this radical rejection of the modern state and democratic politics. I usually don't think that arguing from hypocrisy necessarily invalidates your argument, but for crying out loud why not put your money where your mouth is and quit that nice public job you have in favor of a benevolent private sector college? <br /><br />I also noticed that once again you have no comment about the vile and incendiary comments posted here by your sycophants.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6276561747841568697.post-31063801701804033632012-07-14T01:37:32.293-04:002012-07-14T01:37:32.293-04:00So is Krugman asserting causality between high tax...So is Krugman asserting causality between high tax rates and economic growth? Every time I wear blue pajamas to bed the night before my favorite team plays, my team wins. I guess I'm causing my team to win through my clothing selection then.<br /><br />If Krugman isn't asserting that there is causality, then why bring it up? And if we can find instances showing low growth with high rates, will he concede his analysis is dead wrong? Doubtful. And did Krugman mention how many people actually paid this top rate? The guy is a fraud.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com