Stupidity of austerity

Discussion in 'Economics' started by Covertibility, Sep 30, 2010.

  1. <object width="400" height="300"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="movie" value=";;show_title=1&amp;show_byline=1&amp;show_portrait=1&amp;color=d4283e&amp;fullscreen=1&amp;autoplay=0&amp;loop=0" /><embed src=";;show_title=1&amp;show_byline=1&amp;show_portrait=1&amp;color=d4283e&amp;fullscreen=1&amp;autoplay=0&amp;loop=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" width="400" height="300"></embed></object><p><a href="">WatsonMedia presents Mark Blyth on Austerity</a> from <a href="">The Global Conversation</a> on <a href="">Vimeo</a>.</p>
    From Ritholz' blog.

    Krugman had a few articles regarding the stupidity of austerity porgrams but the common person probably can't understand concepts if they're not in video form.

    2 times that are going to be cited as austerity successes, Ireland 1980's and Canada 1990's. Problems with both of those? Yes. Ireland had to devalue and interest rates declined. Canada had a similar ordeal as the Canadian dollar fell sharply, NAFTA helped increase trade with the booming US, and an expansionary monetary policy was implemented.

    Only the "evolution is a myth because monkeys don't turn into people and btw I don't know which college I went to" type are dumb enough to believe in austerity.
  2. Stupidity = Anyone who listens to anything Krugman says. He was 100% wrong on housing/post-tech bubble for years, and is 100% wrong in his vulgar Keynesian idiocy now.

    "To fight this recession the Fed needs more than a snapback; it needs soaring household spending to offset moribund business investment. And to do that, as Paul McCulley of Pimco put it, Alan Greenspan needs to create a housing bubble to replace the Nasdaq bubble."

    - Paul Krugman, Dubya’s Double Dip, August 2nd, 2002

    Compare to

    "Congress should act to remove taxpayer support from the housing GSEs before the bubble bursts and taxpayers are once again forced to bail out investors who were misled by foolish government interference in the market. I therefore hope this committee will soon stand up for American taxpayers and investors by acting on my Free Housing Market Enhancement Act."

    - Ron Paul in the House Financial Services Committee, September 10, 2003

  3. achilles28


    Ron Paul is looking like a fucking genius, in hindsight.
  4. Just by chance suppose the GSE's had more political power than Congress, hence nothing was done. Ron Paul and others can postulate all they want but our political system is dsyfunctional.
  5. achilles28


    On numerous occasions, Ron Paul stated our political system is dysfunctional and run by special interests - including GSE's.

    At the end of the day, his words are salient. GSE's derive their power from Congressional charter and subsidy. Remove that, and they're history. As they should be.
  6. Well if you want to live in an imaginary world, go right ahead. But Barney Frank, et. al., continually supported the GSEs and refused to do anything about this. He was warned on many occasions. His partner-in-crime, Chris "Countrwide Scandal" Dodd, has received more Fannie and Freddie's PAC money than any other politician.

    But it's not like Congress' hands were tied. No one forced them to cave in.
  7. Ron is the man when it comes to economics. Great guy as well. Anyone in Austin, or when in Austin should pop in and say hello.

    Ron is accessible and loves to chat, when he is in Austin.