Wednesday, March 11, 2009

 

Krugman's Naivete

I am a walking violation of rational expectations theory, because I do not learn. I continue to be shocked by Krugman's blog. Check out this one:
So I read this:
Boehner said Americans want government to practice the same financial restraint they have been forced to exercise: “It’s time for government to tighten their belts and show the American people that we ‘get’ it.”

and I wonder if this country can handle the crisis we’re in. Remember, John Boehner is, in effect, the second-most influential member of the GOP (after Rush Limbaugh)....

So the fact that Boehner’s idea of economics is completely insane matters.

What’s insane about Boehner’s remark? He’s talking about the current economic crisis as if it were a harvest failure — as if we faced a shortage of goods, so that the more you consume the less is left for me. In reality...we’re in a world desperately short of demand. If you consume more, that’s GOOD for me, because it helps create jobs and raise incomes. It’s in my personal disinterest to have you tighten your belt — and that’s just as true if you’re “the government” as if you’re my neighbor.

OK up till now it's just standard "scarcity doesn't apply when unemployment is above 6 percent" nonsense. The first time I read it stated so nakedly (months ago), I was stunned, but I've gotten over it. Yet Krugman continues, and makes a qualitatively worse mistake, that has all the political sophistication of a 7th grader:
Plus, who is “the government”? It’s basically us, you know — the government spends money providing services to the public. Demanding that the government tighten its belt means demanding that we, the taxpayers, get less of those services. Why is this a good thing, even aside from the state of the economy?

Again, this is what the leaders of a powerful, if minority, party think. Can this country be saved?

OK first of all, if the government is "basically us," then Krugman's blog post just proved that Krugman doesn't understand Keynesian economics. After all, Boehner is part of the government, Boehner doesn't understand Keynesian economics, the government is us, Krugman is part of us...you get the idea.

But second of all, notice that Krugman says "even aside from the state of the economy." Let that sink in for a second. Krugman is actually saying that it is NONSENSE for anyone to suggest that there exists even a THEORETICAL DRAWBACK to more government spending, EVER.

Seriously, am I misreading him here? Isn't that what he's saying?

How in the world did we get to a point where a Nobel economist can say that even in normal times, government spending is costless? Can I* be saved?

* You see what I did there?



Comments:
The Blackadder Says:

L'Etat c'est moi.
 
Bob,

I think what you did there is ask the same rhetorical question Krugman asked. After all, we are the government, the government is us, you are us, you are "I," therefore I is us, I is the government, you are the government, so you are asking if the government, aka us, aka this country, can be saved, so you just repeated Krugman.

(breath)

Uhhh... so would it be too cynical/cliched of me to ask if Krugman is currently gallavanting around the globe, consuming every penny he's earned trying to prop up the economy? Or is he patriotically "hoarding" some of his wealth? Or is he just heroically and patriotically waiting for the government to come spend his money for him?

Maybe he thinks if he spends his money before the government spends it for him, that will be bad because then the government won't have any of his money to spend to stimulate the economy? Because obviously when the government spends his money it's better than when he spends his money. And by government, I mean us, of course, so what I am actually saying is it's better for us to spend Krugman's money, than for Krugman to spend his money. And since Krugman is us, I of course mean it's best for Krugman to spend his money than for Krugman to spend his money.

Well, it's a toss up now between that Geithner video I just sent you, and this Krugman post. Let's see, which is more nonsensical... hmmm, hmmmmmm.... hmmm......

.....ka-BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!
 
I have just decided that from now on, because we are the government and I am part of we, I will simply refer to myself as the government, as I feel it gives my actions more moral authority and legitimacy in the eyes of my fellow Americans, aka me, because I am them and they are me and we are us.

So, yeah, time for the government to go to bed. The government has work tomorrow bright and early and if the government doesn't get its sleep, the government is gonna be PRET-TY cranky in his cubicle tomorrow morning!

Man, saving myself from myself sure makes the government sleepy!
 
Can I pay my taxes directly to myself?

I promise I'll do it voluntarily and I will not threaten myself with jail.
 
The more we draw them out, the funnier these Keynesians will be. Both Delong and Krugman have recently been forced to be more explicit with their Keynesian responses. In the past, they have been able to rely on nothing but mockery of anyone proposing "don't spend, save" or "don't inflate". Since Keynesianism is such a fraudulent, infantile and intellectually primitive enterprise, drawing them out will only help expose them for what they are.
 
"He’s talking about the current economic crisis as if it were a harvest failure — as if we faced a shortage of goods, so that the more you consume the less is left for me. In reality...we’re in a world desperately short of demand. If you consume more, that’s GOOD for me..."

I still have demand. Tell you what, to help out everyone should give me all their cars, plasma TVs, houses, and other goods that are no longer demanded and I will take on the burden of consuming them all. It will be difficult, but I think I can manage to consume all the unwanted goods-especially the luxury goods- just to help everyone out of course.
 
Bryan,

Comically, that's actually how Krugman undermined his own argument! As we know from Jean-Baptiste Say, supply is its own demand. When we have a lot of supply, we have a lot of demand because there are many goods that can be traded for other goods. During a harvest failure, supply falls and so too does demand, because there is not enough crop to trade. Right now, there is an OVERSUPPLY of nearly everything (housing, investment vehicles, cars, furniture, commercial real estate, food, etc. etc.) caused by the malinvestment of this false boom... that's why we're seeing collapsing prices. Excess supply creates "buyers' markets" whereas undersupply creates "sellers' markets." Does Krugman do his own consumption spending or does he have a servant do that? If he does his own, he must realize this is a BUYERS' MARKET... I cut deals and get big discounts every single day now.

We're in a world desperately short on economically-viable demand based upon supply that the market actually wants.

As they say, the proof is in the pudding, and this pudding tastes stupid and ignorant!
 
TAYLOR: "Right now, there is an OVERSUPPLY of nearly everything"

Be careful when you phrase it like that. It makes it sound like our problem is having too many goods. Having lots of goods is being wealthy, which is a good thing. The problem is that the supply is too large to justify their current level of (and method of) production. At the current supply the price has fallen to a level where it is not economically viable to continue the production of the goods at the current level.
 
Bryan,

Good catch, and yes of course, you're right. I meant oversupply in the relative sense.

Interpreted the other way, it'd be the same fallacious argument George Reisman castigated in one of his many articles in which he chastises people like Krugman, et. al who seem to be saying "We're poor because we're so rich!"

Thanks!
 
Any time a mainstream economist or (especially) a representative of the government uses the words "us" "we" or "our", you're being lied to and most likely swindled.
 
You will like the ugg boots,you will found More and more people choose cheap ugg boots.So you know that ugg series of the most famous is the ugg boots sale. I recommend you go to online store, there have a lot of Ugg Classic Short boots
Bailey Button
Ugg Classic Mini
Ugg Classic Tall boots
Ugg Classic Cardy
Ugg Nightfall
Bailey ugg Boots
 
Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]





<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]