It’s Time to Stop Taking Paul Krugman Seriously (Compares Krugman's predictions 2 Ron's)

[sailingaway]

It’s Time to Stop Taking Paul Krugman Seriously (Compares Krugman's predictions 2 Ron's)

http://www.jeremyrhammond.com/2012/12/26/its-time-to-stop-taking-paul-krugman-seriously/

 

[phill4paul]

I don't think I have ever taken Krugman seriously. Lol.

 

[liveandletlive]

he calls us "inflationistas" and he won a Nobel prize

unfortunately Krugman is in line with what many Americans believe, endless debt is OK and theres nothin to worry about

 

[J_White]

well, Obama won the Nobel "Peace" Prize, remember !!

 

[ababba]

I read the article, no wrong predictions by krugman in there.

 

[jkr]

 

[unknown]

Krugman is pure scum.

A grown man who consistently resorts to name calling. Hes an effing joke.

 

[talkingpointes]

I read the article, no wrong predictions by krugman in there.

Ohh.. Care to enlighten us ?

 

[SpicyTurkey]

I read the article, no wrong predictions by krugman in there.

Da fuk.

 

[ababba]

Ohh.. Care to enlighten us ?

If by wrong prediction you mean something that Krugman said would happen that didn't, then I believe the burden is on you. I don't see any examples in the article. Do you care to enlighten me?

Many of the points are about his views of future, still to be determined, events.

 

[talkingpointes]

If by wrong prediction you mean something that Krugman said would happen that didn't, then I believe the burden is on you. I don't see any examples in the article. Do you care to enlighten me?

Many of the points are about his views of future, still to be determined, events.

"I and other economists argued from the beginning that these dire warnings of fiscal catastrophe were all wrong, that budget deficits won’t cause soaring interest rates as long as the economy is depressed — and that the biggest risk to the economy is that we might try to slash the deficit too soon."

The only reason interest rates are low is for the reason of the fed buying treasuries and bonds. Interest rates actually did rise a little before being extinguished by the money printing machine.

 

[ababba]

"I and other economists argued from the beginning that these dire warnings of fiscal catastrophe were all wrong, that budget deficits won’t cause soaring interest rates as long as the economy is depressed — and that the biggest risk to the economy is that we might try to slash the deficit too soon."

The only reason interest rates are low is for the reason of the fed buying treasuries and bonds. Interest rates actually did rise a little before being extinguished by the money printing machine.

That's not how the prediction game works my friend. You don't get to say Krugman was right but for the wrong reason.

When you make a prediction that X is going to happen in a certain amount of time, you are wrong when X doesn't happen in the correct amount of time. That's what I'm looking for. Or when you say Y will never happen and it does, then you are wrong.

 

[sailingaway]

That's not how the prediction game works my friend. You don't get to say Krugman was right but for the wrong reason.

When you make a prediction that X is going to happen in a certain amount of time, you are wrong when X doesn't happen in the correct amount of time. That's what I'm looking for. Or when you say Y will never happen and it does, then you are wrong.

I only scanned the article and I don't remember what was in it, but Krugman made a bunch of bad predictions when the housing bubble was going. Ron predicted the crash, Krugman and Bernanke the opposite, as I recall. Krugman also thought throwing money at the crash would fix it.

 

[ababba]

I only scanned the article and I don't remember what was in it, but Krugman made a bunch of bad predictions when the housing bubble was going. Ron predicted the crash, Krugman and Bernanke the opposite, as I recall. Krugman also thought throwing money at the crash would fix it.

Like what bad predictions? Maybe he did, but I haven't seen it yet.

Actually you are dead wrong on the last point. He thought the stimulus passed was far from enough to end the recession. He suggested it should be much larger.

 

[cbrons]

Seriously, this guy is a statist lout. Totally predictable, doctrinaire hack.

 

[sailingaway]

Like what bad predictions? Maybe he did, but I haven't seen it yet.

Actually you are dead wrong on the last point. He thought the stimulus passed was far from enough to end the recession. He suggested it should be much larger.

I am aware he thought the stimulus was far too small, but a lot of spending bills were passed after that, that was hardly the end of the spending.

He made bad predictions when Ron was predicting the housing collapse, but I don't recall the precise places he said them. Someone did a comparison of their predictions after that 'debate' on TV he and Ron had though.

 

[talkingpointes]

That's not how the prediction game works my friend. You don't get to say Krugman was right but for the wrong reason.

When you make a prediction that X is going to happen in a certain amount of time, you are wrong when X doesn't happen in the correct amount of time. That's what I'm looking for. Or when you say Y will never happen and it does, then you are wrong.

But his predictions were made with those facts. How can you not see that. He is pretending the market is free and unbound. Leaving out the truth is not the truth any longer. That is just one example.

 

[talkingpointes]

Here is another not mentioned in the article.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/17/paul-krugman-stimulus-too_n_167721.html

Unemployment won't go above 9%, and the 2nd stimulus wasn't enough.

 

[talkingpointes]

Here he is calling himself and the "Obama" administration wrong on their overly optimistic feelings on the state of the economy. (Although he doesn't tie himself in there)

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/12/opinion/krugman-triumph-of-the-wrong.html?_r=0

 

[ababba]

But his predictions were made with those facts. How can you not see that. He is pretending the market is free and unbound. Leaving out the truth is not the truth any longer. That is just one example.

This is about whether you just assume someone is wrong or you use evidence to actually prove it. One is stupid and the other is not.