<a title="View 50 Charts From Marc Faber on Scribd" href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/114206272/50-Charts-From-Marc-Faber" style="margin: 12px auto 6px auto; font-family: Helvetica,Arial,Sans-serif; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 14px; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; -x-system-font: none; display: block; text-decoration: underline;">50 Charts From Marc Faber</a><iframe class="scribd_iframe_embed" src="http://www.scribd.com/embeds/114206272/content?start_page=1&view_mode=scroll&access_key=key-20k4e7jy668dqddou443" data-auto-height="true" data-aspect-ratio="1.33333333333333" scrolling="no" id="doc_53032" width="100%" height="600" frameborder="0"></iframe> Feel free to discuss a slide. I'm not sure I agree with every one of them, but most are spot on, and so is his conclusion.
The least bit of research will show you that the image and quote are botched, and they do not represent the actual statements and article written by either man.
Really? At every turn of sanguine economic events krugman has proposed only one thing throw more money at it. As a matter of fact his only complaint has been we haven't thrown more govt spending at it. So while you say the quotes are botched are you also saying it doesn't accurately reflect his past positions ?
Bullshit, the quote is spot on, and it was only when the quote blew up in his face, that he later tried to walk it back saying something along the lines of, "yeah well i was just saying what the solution was, and what the fed was going to do i wasnt endorsing it" Krugman is a liar, and a douche who wont even accept he is wrong, when its right in his face, thus he is not a credible source. And for you to believe his B.S. when he tries walking that statement back years later, just goes to show you are simply drinking the kool-aid, and you will accept anything he says, no matter how assinine. BTW, whats the difference between what he was saying then and what he is saying now? He is once again simply calling for more inflation from the fed with no regard as to how it can end up, right after the worst bubble blow up since the great depression. The original quote from krugman is keynsian economics in a nut shell, simply try to create new bubbles to replace the old ones, until it gets bigger and bigger, and then it eventually becomes impossible to create a new bubble big enough to replace the old one, then the system collapses.
The quote is correct, but in the context of the article, he clearly was not advocating a housing bubble. He was predicting-correctly- that Easy Al was going to continue to juice the housing market. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/02/opinion/dubya-s-double-dip.html Max E. didn't read the article; he only read the the repackaging of the few sentences.