Krugman: Third Depression Watch

Damocles

Damocles

Accedo!
Staff member
Paul Krugman

May 25, 2011, 12:31 pm

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/25/third-depression-watch/?smid=tw-NytimesKrugman&seid=auto

Last year I warned that we seemed to be heading into the “Third Depression” — by which I meant a prolonged period of economic weakness:

Neither the Long Depression of the 19th century nor the Great Depression of the 20th was an era of nonstop decline — on the contrary, both included periods when the economy grew. But these episodes of improvement were never enough to undo the damage from the initial slump, and were followed by relapses.

We are now, I fear, in the early stages of a third depression. It will probably look more like the Long Depression than the much more severe Great Depression. But the cost — to the world economy and, above all, to the millions of lives blighted by the absence of jobs — will nonetheless be immense.
Click to expand...

More at link...

(And people told me to listen to Krugman rather than tell people we may be in a long painful period... Interesting how Krugman actually agrees.)
 
It's so hard to talk economic facts w/ you idiots without it ending up in some form of extreme exaggeration.

Leading indicators are trending up. That does NOT mean that "all is well."

Fools.
 
Onceler said:
It's so hard to talk economic facts w/ you idiots without it ending up in some form of extreme exaggeration.

Leading indicators are trending up. That does NOT mean that "all is well."

Fools.
Click to expand...

So... Basically I am a "fool" for understanding and agreeing with a Nobel Laureate. While you are a genius for trying to ignore that?

Okay. I'm good with that. Yeah, I exaggerate when I say you "All is Well!" everybody. But you certainly do ignore the indications that we are heading into something deeper and longer than any of us want and that the Trillions (yes trillions, I realize you will refuse to recognize any of the money spent that wasn't in that one bill as efforts to fix things, but I think you are hopelessly naive) that this Administration spent to get us "back on track" haven't moved us one iota from the path to debt problems...

Yeah, there are fools in this nation.
 
Damocles said:
So... Basically I am a "fool" for understanding and agreeing with a Nobel Laureate. While you are a genius for trying to ignore that?

Okay. I'm good with that. Yeah, I exaggerate when I say you "All is Well!" everybody. But you certainly do ignore the indications that we are heading into something deeper and longer than any of us want and that the Trillions (yes trillions, I realize you will refuse to recognize any of the money spent that wasn't in that one bill as efforts to fix things, but I think you are hopelessly naive) that this Administration spent to get us "back on track" haven't moved us one iota from the path to debt problems...

Yeah, there are fools in this nation.
Click to expand...


So you're on board with additional stimulus spending? Awesome. Welcome aboard!
 
David St. Hubbins said:
So you're on board with additional stimulus spending? Awesome. Welcome aboard!
Click to expand...

Nah, that's where we diverge. Krugman is a fool for promoting the same unsuccessful pattern that Japan went through. But at least he fully comprehends that what was done was ineffective. Too bad he wants to throw more borrowed money after bad.
 
Damocles said:
So... Basically I am a "fool" for understanding and agreeing with a Nobel Laureate. While you are a genius for trying to ignore that?

Okay. I'm good with that. Yeah, I exaggerate when I say you "All is Well!" everybody. But you certainly do ignore the indications that we are heading into something deeper and longer than any of us want and that the Trillions (yes trillions, I realize you will refuse to recognize any of the money spent that wasn't in that one bill as efforts to fix things, but I think you are hopelessly naive) that this Administration spent to get us "back on track" haven't moved us one iota from the path to debt problems...

Yeah, there are fools in this nation.
Click to expand...

I got news for ya - we were losing trillions before the stimulus, and would have continued to lose trillions, and we would have owed that as much as we owe the stimulus back. I know you don't agree w/ Keynes, but I do, and I disagree vehemently that a few tax cuts would have gotten us out of the woods in '09.

You & yours always have to shift the argument & ridicule when it comes to the economy. I can't say that economic indicators are trending up - which they have been for over 6 months now - without you & yours telling me that I'm also saying the economy is fantastic. Could Krugman be right? Of course - but there is just as much chance, imo, that he is wrong, and that growth will continue & even flourish in the years ahead.

But maybe he's right, and you'll be happy about that, because then I'll have been wrong. Good luck....
 
Onceler said:
I got news for ya - we were losing trillions before the stimulus, and would have continued to lose trillions, and we would have owed that as much as we owe the stimulus back. I know you don't agree w/ Keynes, but I do, and I disagree vehemently that a few tax cuts would have gotten us out of the woods in '09.

You & yours always have to shift the argument & ridicule when it comes to the economy. I can't say that economic indicators are trending up - which they have been for over 6 months now - without you & yours telling me that I'm also saying the economy is fantastic. Could Krugman be right? Of course - but there is just as much chance, imo, that he is wrong, and that growth will continue & even flourish in the years ahead.

But maybe he's right, and you'll be happy about that, because then I'll have been wrong. Good luck....
Click to expand...

Right. So basically either I "want" it to be bad, or I agree with you.

Stupid. Just flat stupid. Can you point to one post of mine that said we should use "just tax cuts"? (I'll give you a hint, I haven't said it so the post won't be there).

And if you agree with Keynes then why are you not insisting that the stimulus money be spent solely on infrastructure? Keynes theory is that it doesn't matter where it is spent so long as it is on INFRASTRUCTURE. That last word is the important bit. Shovel ready jobs, remember how they weren't there? Most of us do.

I hope beyond measure that we get past this in spite of the ineffective "stimulus" and we do well. Even if it means the republicans lose the White House for another four years.
 
Damocles said:
Nah, that's where we diverge. Krugman is a fool for promoting the same unsuccessful pattern that Japan went through. But at least he fully comprehends that what was done was ineffective. Too bad he wants to throw more borrowed money after bad.
Click to expand...

Wait, I thought that just a few posts ago you were commending Krugman as a Nobel Laureate and dismissing the idea that you were a fool for agreeing with him. I guess you were agreeing with Onceler that you were a fool for agreeing with Krugmnan since he is apparently a fool, too, in addition to being a Nobel Laureate. Weird.

And, by the way, I think it would behoove you to actually click through to the column fron June of last year in which Krugman originally made the Third Depression prediction. You may learn a thing or two.
 
Damocles said:
Right. So basically either I "want" it to be bad, or I agree with you.

Stupid. Just flat stupid. Can you point to one post of mine that said we should use "just tax cuts"? (I'll give you a hint, I haven't said it so the post won't be there).

And if you agree with Keynes then why are you not insisting that the stimulus money be spent solely on infrastructure? Keynes theory is that it doesn't matter where it is spent so long as it is on INFRASTRUCTURE. That last word is the important bit. Shovel ready jobs, remember how they weren't there? Most of us do.

I hope beyond measure that we get past this in spite of the ineffective "stimulus" and we do well. Even if it means the republicans lose the White House for another four years.
Click to expand...


Uh, Keynes said it doesn't matter how the money is spent, hence, paying one man to dig a hole and another to fill it in.
 
lol....onceler still thinks the indicators are up....i guess it is easy to be delusional because he ignores all the cites given to him by other posters that show he is wrong.

for the record...i haven't seen one cite from onceler, just his holier than thou opinion...then again, he has a compelling need to feel smarter than everyone on the board and has no problem saying so
 
David St. Hubbins said:
Wait, I thought that just a few posts ago you were commending Krugman as a Nobel Laureate and dismissing the idea that you were a fool for agreeing with him. I guess you were agreeing with Onceler that you were a fool for agreeing with Krugmnan since he is apparently a fool, too, in addition to being a Nobel Laureate. Weird.

And, by the way, I think it would behoove you to actually click through to the column fron June of last year in which Krugman originally made the Third Depression prediction. You may learn a thing or two.
Click to expand...

saved

this is great....i can't count the times you agree with someone on one thing, but not another and claim that is OK. now.....a different story.
 
Yurt said:
lol....onceler still thinks the indicators are up....i guess it is easy to be delusional because he ignores all the cites given to him by other posters that show he is wrong.

for the record...i haven't seen one cite from onceler, just his holier than thou opinion...then again, he has a compelling need to feel smarter than everyone on the board and has no problem saying so
Click to expand...

Again - you seem to have issues w/ the word "trending." You clearly don't know what it means.

And if you don't know that most leading indicators have been trending up for over 6 months now....what are you doing in a discussion about the economy?
 
David St. Hubbins said:
Wait, I thought that just a few posts ago you were commending Krugman as a Nobel Laureate and dismissing the idea that you were a fool for agreeing with him. I guess you were agreeing with Onceler that you were a fool for agreeing with Krugmnan since he is apparently a fool, too, in addition to being a Nobel Laureate. Weird.

And, by the way, I think it would behoove you to actually click through to the column fron June of last year in which Krugman originally made the Third Depression prediction. You may learn a thing or two.
Click to expand...

He and I agree on many things, just not everything. I'm still waiting for some evidence of what you pretend I have said. You have any evidence that I have ever suggested we use solely tax cuts to bring us out of the stagflation path?
 
David St. Hubbins said:
Wait, I thought that just a few posts ago you were commending Krugman as a Nobel Laureate and dismissing the idea that you were a fool for agreeing with him. I guess you were agreeing with Onceler that you were a fool for agreeing with Krugmnan since he is apparently a fool, too, in addition to being a Nobel Laureate. Weird.

And, by the way, I think it would behoove you to actually click through to the column fron June of last year in which Krugman originally made the Third Depression prediction. You may learn a thing or two.
Click to expand...

He and I agree on many things, just not everything. I'm still waiting for some evidence of what you pretend I have said. You have any evidence that I have ever suggested we use solely tax cuts to bring us out of the stagflation path?
 
still no links and still ignoring links from myself and other posters....

that's fine, if you want to live your life in an onceler induced bubble....go for it, but don't pass off your opinions as facts
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top