SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Post-Crash Index-Moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: koan who wrote (39894)9/13/2011 12:54:07 AM
From: Oblivious  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 119360
 
So where would we be without keeping the taxes the same. 25% higher than Reagan's taxes.



To: koan who wrote (39894)9/13/2011 1:03:10 AM
From: TH10 Recommendations  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 119360
 
k,

I've read (most) those guys too, and I do not include Krugman in that class. Krugman and Feynman do not belong in the same sentence, IMO.

Perhaps I framed my question incorrectly. It is not if Krugman is a bright guy, but really what economic solution he has put forth that is simply not money printing. I am asking for an example of how Krugman is any different from the dozens of Keynesians that proceeded him (well, excepting scale, for he is certainly in a class all his own in that regard <g>).

At the end of it, all Krugman is saying to do is to spend more money we do not have. That is it. No wear does Krugman talk about the implications for the old on fixed, or the tragic result of such monetary expansion on poor people around the world that are in the unfortunate position of having to live with Dollar peg and requiring a huge percentage of their pitiful income to feed themselves. Those are just two results of such a massive monetary expansion. Do you not agree that our current Fed policy was a major driver of the turmoil in say Egypt earlier this year?

Krugman, for being such a clever guy, does not do a good job hiding his serious blindspot from his politics. That is another point to at least consider. Krugman's solutions are all filtered through a fairly polarized political alliance.

In any event, I do not mean to offend, but I see Krugman and Bernanke as part of the problem.

GT
TH



To: koan who wrote (39894)9/13/2011 11:13:49 AM
From: pstuartb15 Recommendations  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 119360
 
The problem with advocating a 4 trillion dollar infrastructure program now is we've already blown our wad and then some on saving the banks. To the extent Krugman had a point in 2008, that door has shut.

The trillions of dollars the government has wasted in the last few years has put us so far in debt we can't afford now to do anything sensible in terms of infrastructure stimulus.