T Nation

Doomed to Repeat the Past


#1

http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2009/20090107152856.aspx

And despite the staggering deficit figures, some are spreading fear that the economy will come crashing down if immediate, drastic ? and expensive ? action is not taken. One example is New York Times columnist and Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman, who in his Jan. 5 column detailed his ?nightmare scenario?:

?It takes Congress months to pass a stimulus plan, and the legislation that actually emerges is too cautious,? Krugman wrote. ?As a result, the economy plunges for most of 2009, and when the plan finally starts to kick in, it?s only enough to slow the descent, not stop it. Meanwhile, deflation is setting in, while businesses and consumers start to base their spending plans on the expectation of a permanently depressed economy ? well, you can see where this is going.?

?So this is our moment of truth,? Krugman continued. ?Will we in fact do what?s necessary to prevent Great Depression II??

Nobel prize winning economist doesn't even understand what failed miserably during the first great depression. We are in for a world of hurt my friends.


#2

I'll take the Nobel prize winning economist over the douchebag wingnut sycophant on this one.


#3

Yes, you will.

Whether you want to, or not, whether he is right, or not...


#4

How about the economic stimulous package in the article? I just can't wrap my head around how one can think this is good plan. One of two things are happening here.

Creating money out of thin air. Not exactly good for the market. I have yet to see any double digit inflation bring prosperity.

Take this money from someone. Are they going to take this money from then unproductive or the productive? What possible benefit can come from taking it from the productive?

I am not listing debt as an alternative because eventually one of the above must happen.


#5

Quite a few Nobel prize winners were morons. Just because someone gets a prize doesn't mean crap. It does in science and other proven disciplines where there are provable results - not in economics and other bullshit disciplines which are basically people's idiotic opinions. You may as well give someone a prize for pretty poetry.

All that matters in economy is efficient production of desirable goods, building infrastructure/capitalising to increase efficiency of production/education, always with focus on DESIRABLE goods, useful goods, not creating work for the sake of work nor creating crap and trying to flog it and not pushing paper around pretending that is productive nor playing the markets or inventing ways to scam people with investments (like sub primes) and definetely not giving more money to the stupid majority of people who will spend it on beer, fags and holidays to "stimulate" the economy when the economy is mostly based on consumption not production.

Your country is broke, it won't be fixed by making it more broke by borrowing more and spending on things of zero worth.

Now instead of just whining, here is a real life example of a useful stimulis:

  1. give money to elitefts to ramp up their gym production
  2. boost funding for education on health benefits of weights especially for the elderly
  3. ban all bullshit advertising that misleads people to junk diets, junk food, and exercise fads
  4. increase the market of making gym gear and education so that every 2nd home has a gym and the skill to use it

then you get a population that increases health etc... save money on healthcare and downtime at work etc... and so forth

this is especially important for the aging, it costs billions of dollars looking after the elderly just to treat injuries from falling over


#6

uh...

Why not just let people spend their own money on whatever it is they think they want or need? That is the quickest way to "fix" the economy there is.

...and I don't even have a Nobel Prize in economics.


#7

Nor will you ever get one if you keep talking like that.


#8

Give it 100 years and someone saying that will be praised for "re-inventing economics".


#9

and thus my quest for immortality...


#10

Because the Nobel price is not handed out posthumously?


#11

Didn't Paul Krugman predict this disaster when all your hero's were assuring us that we would be ok?

Also, you didn't mind trillions of dollars being spend in Iraq, but when they want to spent that money building roads, bridges and schools in the US, then you object?

Perhaps you want a Nobel prize for patriotism?


#12

No, so that I could experience what such a world would be like.


#13

No, he didn't and he doesn't even know what the actual "disaster" is so how could he predict it.


#14

which heros?

who is apposed to building roads bridges and schools? Aren't we arlready doing that?

The gov't is suppose to protect us. Not put us to work. Not put me to work to fund failing businesses. Not put me to work to fund other citizens that did not earn it.

What i do mind is taking from the productive to give to the less productive. How again is this good for a sinking economy?

Booms and busts are a normal part of the business cycle. The bust is the correction to the boom and provides for a healthy economy. The gov't will completly fuck it up just like they did in the late 20s and all through the 30s. If you can't understand this, you have a bit of reading to do.


#15

Which shows why

... you don't understand it
... you should not be allowed to vote
... democracy does nto work

That is a F#@$@ing stupid idea. Spending the money on what people want is what caused the mess in the first place.

People don't want want they NEED for a strong economy they want toys and fun and crap and mess around.

The only time letting the people run the economy with their "wants" is if they are hardworking, dilligent, wise, saving, investing, country-building people.

Your focus needs to be on productivity, work, not on play, toys, fun.


#16

You have seen the Mad Max Movies, havenĀ“t you?


#17

No he did not.

Peter Schiff, Ron Paul and others did however.


#18

Well, back to fascism then, and telling people how to spend their money.

That worked so incredibly well in the past.


#19

No actually if you look at what people were doing it was spending money they didn't have on stuff they wanted. This of course was all backed up by central banking and government bailouts, etc. Credit is a fine tool but not when all we are doing is borrowing more money to pay off credit cards, etc. That is where our problems begin.

I agree that democracy doesn't work. I am an anarchist.

Well, I only half agree with you. As long as people are productive they can spend their income on whatever they want.


#20

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. I would suggest reading even a single book on economics if you are interested in posting somethink remotely intellegent on the subject.