Slog Comments


Comments (22) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
Good to see one of you folks just come right out and admit you let Krugman and the NYT do your thinking for you.
Posted by Billy Chav on January 4, 2013 at 3:23 PM · Report this
Will in Seattle 2
He said work, not thinking.

Look, just cut all the Red State military and Big Ag funding and we'll be right as rain.

And put all tax exemptions up for a vote of the People. 2/3 majority to pass.
Posted by Will in Seattle on January 4, 2013 at 3:29 PM · Report this
Goldy 3

@1 Refute it. Refute Krugman. Refute the arguments in the Bloomberg link. Refute everything Dean Baker has written on the subject. Show me the math that explains why this thesis is wrong. Show me the fucking math!

Posted by Goldy on January 4, 2013 at 3:37 PM · Report this
Pope Peabrain 5
The economy would be doing much better if Republicans stopped their foolishness. But they won't stop because their real goal is to damage this president's record of success.
Posted by Pope Peabrain on January 4, 2013 at 3:45 PM · Report this
@1 Krugman exposed the housing bubble AND Dotcom busts long before they happened. And all the Wall Street apologists and wingnuts said he was crazy.

He's been right 9 times out of ten. So. Fuck yeah. I'll listen to him before I'd listen to you.
Posted by tkc on January 4, 2013 at 3:50 PM · Report this
You_Gotta_Be_Kidding_Me 7
So then we can cut taxes on everyone, because, hey, deficits don't matter! Right?
Posted by You_Gotta_Be_Kidding_Me on January 4, 2013 at 4:02 PM · Report this
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Nobody who idolizes Ronald Reagan and seeks to emulate his policies should be taken seriously when they engage in hand-wringing about deficits.

It's not as if "Starving the Beast" is some big secret -- Republicans have acknowledged for decades that running up deficits and then using those deficits as pretext to gut social spending is a strategy that they have consciously and assiduously pursued.
Posted by Proteus on January 4, 2013 at 4:08 PM · Report this
Goldy 9
@7 I never said that deficits don't matter. Jesus. Read the piece. The budget is sustainable as long as long as the debt to GDP ratio is stable or declining. Is that really too hard a concept to wrap your mind around?
Posted by Goldy on January 4, 2013 at 4:13 PM · Report this
The Republican strategy is now (at least) 40 years old, since it's now the birthday of Lewis Powell's memorandum to the US Chamber of Commerce.…
Posted by sarah70 on January 4, 2013 at 4:33 PM · Report this
9 geez, Cheney said it. Take it easy.
Posted by MikeB on January 4, 2013 at 4:36 PM · Report this
dirac 12
God this thread is so full of shit. This is a bipartisan game. Who created the debt commission in the middle of a depression? Your Own Personal Jesus. Who loves Reagan more than Republicans? Your Own Personal Jesus. At no point in time did the Democrats NOT have leverage. If the government shut down the Republicans would be more unpopular. The administration has the authority and obligation to pay Congress' debts. Platinum coins, 14th Amendment, etc. I have little faith Obama will use them because the game is to squeeze the lower class. So yeah, we're in the transpartisan era. It's just not going to be good for anybody in the lower class. If I'm wrong and this President and Dem party get spine or grow a heart, then yay, but given their awful track record thus far I'm not holding my breath.
Posted by dirac on January 4, 2013 at 5:17 PM · Report this
Some points: Not too long ago it was determined that Krugman was the most accurate of the Sunday pundits. The best way to predict accuracy of the pundits was this - the more left of center the more accurate, the more right of center the less accurate at prediction.

My feeling is that right of center and far-right economists have stopped accepting data that contradicts their beliefs. Until this changes their influence will be primarily as propagandists and supporting the status of dog-eat-dog financiers. (dog-eat-dog is actually big dog-eats-little dogs)

The biggest stumbling point of most right-of-center folks is a belief that money is a "thing" - solid and of fixed size. Money is a promise. You can exchange it for goods or services. It's linked to how productive a corporation, individual, or society is.

When people get scared of "the debt" it's because they believe it's eating away at a solid thing. When you consider "the debt" to be like a loan, something that greases the wheels of progress, it's suddenly more important to keep it the right size, not a fixed size.

If you have too much debt relative to GDP the flow becomes overheated. Too little debt and the economy goes cold.

It's like saying you can't afford more blankets when you've got the flu, because you're not working and not making money.
Posted by Dan B on January 4, 2013 at 5:17 PM · Report this
DeaconBlues 14
reminder that winning a nobel prize in economics isn't a reliable indicator of validity. they gave one to milton friedman, after all.
Posted by DeaconBlues on January 4, 2013 at 5:30 PM · Report this
Knat 17
I'm glad we've got Alan Grayson back in the House. Already he's making the rounds and cutting through the bullshit on this issue.
Posted by Knat on January 4, 2013 at 6:34 PM · Report this
Here's the problem - everyone in this country wants the federal budget to be EASY to understand, and it's not. There is math. It's not like a person's budget in their house. You have to have taken more than Econ 101 to understand it fully. Or even Econ 201. It is hard, it is technical, and it is complicated.

That doesn't mean you it's over your head. It's not IF you're willing to sit down and do some serious reading and come to some of your own conclusions.

But there will ALWAYS be people willing to say to us, "no, no, it's not complicated at all. Everything you need to know about the federal budget fits on a 3x5 flashcard."

99% of the demagoguery on this issue can be traced to people who either think the federal budget is as complicated as balancing their checkbook, or wants YOU to believe that stupid shit.

And that is some unbelievably stupid shit.
Posted by nullbull on January 4, 2013 at 9:19 PM · Report this
The biggest scam is the stupid comment by TeaPartiers (or let's just say Republicans, since they're identical): "The gubmint should only spend what it takes in, just like my family does!" Said by people who are maxed out on mortgages, credit cards, and car payments.
Posted by sarah70 on January 5, 2013 at 12:04 AM · Report this
The Bloomberg piece sensibly concludes, "None of this is to say that the long-run budget picture is sustainable. In fact, it plainly is not, as the federal government faces a severe challenge of financing the large and growing cost of its health programs. But the U.S.'s budget problem is not as dire as the budget numbers would imply at first glance."

Wish Krug-o-philes could admit at least this much. Cartoon Keynesians are just as imbecile as Supply-Siders.
Posted by Billy Chav on January 5, 2013 at 12:47 PM · Report this
prompt 23
Just because it's sustainable doesn't mean that we shouldn't work to eliminate the estimated $5 trillion in interest alone that this debt is costing this country.(…)
Posted by prompt on January 5, 2013 at 5:51 PM · Report this
dirac 24
@23 Which is why we needn't be in the business of having an intermediary loan us the money we could print in the first place. (I.e. issuing debt instruments is optional)
Posted by dirac on January 6, 2013 at 12:30 AM · Report this
dirac 25
@23 Which is why we needn't be in the business of having an intermediary loan us the money we could print in the first place. (I.e. issuing debt instruments is optional)

Apropros this thread:…
Posted by dirac on January 6, 2013 at 12:41 AM · Report this
@23 since 2010 the US has been getting negative real interest rates on government debt, we actually save money by borrowing it now rather than later, so the smart thing to do is use this opportunity to reinforce our fragile recovery with spending so that we're in a stronger position to make cuts in a stable economy when interest rates increase.

Posted by bitwise on January 6, 2013 at 1:32 AM · Report this
Goldy 27
@22 Um, the first line of the Krugman block quote is:

Now, America does have a long-run budget problem, thanks to our aging population and the rising cost of health care.

Same as the Bloomberg conclusion. Nobody is denying that.
Posted by Goldy on January 6, 2013 at 7:54 PM · Report this

Add a comment

Commenting on this item is available only to registered commenters.