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

[ababba]

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.

Numerical predictions are always idiotic, because there are so many things you can't anticipate in the future. I would like to see some numerical predictions by Ron or Peter Schiff to compare their records, but good point.

 

[sailingaway]

Numerical predictions are always idiotic, because there are so many things you can't anticipate in the future. I would like to see some numerical predictions by Ron or Peter Schiff to compare their records, but good point.

Ron knows numerical predictions are idiotic and doesn't make them.

 

[talkingpointes]

Ron knows numerical predictions are idiotic and doesn't make them.

I was just going to say that.

The Austrian school as a whole excludes almost entirely economic modeling. How predictions are made is why each other comes to the conclusion they do and why they are wrong. These numbers as abaaba mentions have entirely to many variables. Economic models only work on perfect planets. However forecasting graphs and charts is different for analysis.

 

[talkingpointes]

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.

Neither are stupid, but only one can be right. One acknowledges true pricing and monetary systems and the other is out to print a ton of money for his friends. Yes, to me it's that simple. Krugman is the epitome of a sophist.

 

[talkingpointes]

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Austrian_school

 

[FreeHampshire]

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

Then why take him seriously in the first place if the bulk of what he said has not been determined yet?

 

[WilliamShrugged]

Notice that Paul is being pretty objective in this video. Bernanke fails on the prediction game. His brief part where he is wrong is that his "nobody knows" is wrong.



This is before the housing crisis and listen to his predictions. He is not off. I disagree with his solutions and THAT is where he is wrong.
example here: http://articles.businessinsider.com...1_interest-rates-housing-bubble-policy-makers

“In time this overhang will be worked off. Meanwhile, economic policy should encourage other spending to offset the temporary slump in business investment. Low interest rates, which promote spending on housing and other durable goods, are the main answer.”

 

[ababba]

http://consultingbyrpm.com/blog/2011/10/update-on-my-inflation-bets.html

Here is what happens when one of the Austrians puts their money where their mouth is about their philosophy.

 

[ababba]

Then why take him seriously in the first place if the bulk of what he said has not been determined yet?

Take seriously to me means listen to their arguments and decide for yourself whether those arguments are correct based on logic and evidence. Its what a thinking person should do with any Economist.

 

[kcchiefs6465]

'Stop?' I never started.

 

[FreeHampshire]

Take seriously to me means listen to their arguments and decide for yourself whether those arguments are correct based on logic and evidence. Its what a thinking person should do with any Economist.

Not exactly, it's true that economists isn't a set science and the myriad of competing economist schools prove that, but you still haven't given any example as to why we should take Krugman seriously if the vast majority of which he said hasn't been determined yet.

 

[TruckinMike]

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

Lets not forget this little jewel:

Krugman ---> Austerian = Austrian, oh really???

from

http://bastiat.mises.org/2013/01/austrians-are-not-austerians/

Austrians are not Austerians
By Daniel J. Sanchez · Comments (1)
Wednesday, January 2nd, 2013

Robert Wenzel makes this important point.

[Krugman] writes:

Has there been anything comparable on the Austrian/Austerian side?

Why would any economist who knows anything about Austrian economics and bankster austerity programs link the two? Austrian economists have never supported any plan to suck dry the masses via taxation to payoff banksters holding government debt, which is what austerity programs are all about. As the leading Austrian economist, Murray Rothbard, put it:

I propose, then, a seemingly drastic but actually far less destructive way of paying off the public debt at a single blow: outright debt repudiation.

This is the exact opposite of austerity programs, which are designed to prop up sovereign debt and insure the banksters are paid.

TMike

 

[sailingaway]

Lets not forget this little jewel:

Krugman ---> Austerian = Austrian, oh really???

from

http://bastiat.mises.org/2013/01/austrians-are-not-austerians/



TMike