This whole thread is some strange allegory of the Bush Administration it seems. 1) Bad news arrives 2) Unable to counter, the PR campaign eventually attacks the source 3) When refuted, and again asked about substance, the talk turns to "why are we turning everything into a partisan mudfight?" Waste of time.
Ive got 10 bucks says BigTexxx still has no reply to any of the points made. And another 10 bucks says even if he does return to this thread, which he wont more then likely now that he has been embarrassed, it will be merely to bash and whine.
LOL...I don't read Krugman. He's incredibly biased and frankly I cannot trust his rants because of that. embarrassed, me?? LOL - if you want to see public humiliation go look how I shamed andymoon in the economy/Katrina thread. I put him in his place.
Perhaps you should take your crusade to the GARM and NBA forums where posting of "subscriber only" conent occurs much more regularly (by the way - you don't need to post ESPN Insider passwords when the articles themselves are already posted). I think you could make a difference.
No, you don't read Krugman because you just can't handle factual information presented by a true economic expert. Try again, rookie. I answered every single one of your "points" and refuted all of your claims. You are welcome to revisit that thread if you like, but be prepared for further drubbing.
you said "the economy is booming" you said "I'm an economy graduate from Rice" well get a subscription you cheapass..
LOL...you're correct that I'm not short on money, but I will not contribute to a biased newspaper such as the NY Times... I do not have a degree in economics. I have a BS and a BA from Rice...neither of which are in economics....yet I am still able to humble folks like andymoon who have taken a money and banking class! not sure what an "economy graduate" is...
how much is it really?? so why are you asking for the link? you think its not true? if he is so biased why not debate the points in the article..
You're going to need to try MUCH harder to humble me, especially with the way I destroyed your "arguments" in the last economy thread.
moon, are you still claiming the fed is espousing an expansionary policy?? LOL...that was your end in that thread...
No, I never once claimed that the Fed is expanding the monetary base. Once again I will offer to put you in touch with a remedial reading instructor since it appears that you need one.
Krugman is extremely partisan and his partisanship only hurts his credibility. Iraq is GW's problem and he is responsible for whatever happens there. Right or wrong - he convinced the nation to go to war - and he has to deal with the consequences. However - I think the New Orleans/Katrina stuff Krugman pins on Bush is unfair. There was a 60 Minutes segment on a few weeks ago about how New Orleans is sinking now and how it will become and island in 80 years or so - that the only feasible way to ensure the longterm viability of the city if to erect huge levees that could take years to build. I read stuff from the Baton Rouge news about how rebuilding New Orleans may not be viable. IMHO - New Orleans may be a lost cause. It will continue to exist as a shadow of its former self. The combination of sanitation and levee problems make reconstruction far too risky. I think a lot of politicos know this and just don't have the gumption right now to admit it publicly.
....and yet, he has an academic reputation which destroys that of any of the pretendo-nomicists supply siders that you embarrass yourself by aligning with.
his reputation is great among the Arianna Huffington/Jesse Jackson/Billary crowd. You're correct, Sam! elsewhere he is dismissed as the partisan hack that he is
Yes, by eminent pornographers and tele-conometric geniuses like Bill O'Rellly and yourself who will never publish a paper in your whole pretend-onomic careers. Was it you or elder brother who likes to cite Lawrence Kudlow as a real economist, whom you may recognize from such shows that nobody watches such as Kudlow & Cramer? Talk about laughable...
Let me see. Krugman writes liberal op-ed pieces. Liberals love him and wingnuts hate him. Imagine that. But you know Krugman does have street cred among mainstream economicists. To dismiss everything he writes wrt economics is just plain silly. BTW supply siders said the tax cuts would pay for themselves wiht revenue growth. Did not happen. Their theories have failed (just like mainstream economicists said they would). Common sense conservatives should be in open revolt.