I do so love irony.
Nonsense, Mr Kernan! The printing of more and more money and the sabotaging of the energy sector have nothing whatever to do with raising prices for commodities. How dare you even float such drivel, unsupported as it is by “some economists” (like, for instance, Krugman). It’s drought that’s causing the rise in food prices. Which, let me remind you, is tied to global warming and all this human exhalation of CO2 — none of which could be helped by the ending of ethanol subsidies, or genetically modified corn, or the regulatory boot taken of the throats of farmers.
Similarly, it’s global demand for oil causing the rise in oil and gas prices — which would not be lessened in any significant way were we to, say, produce more oil and natural gas. After all, hurricanes shut down some refineries. What’s to say if we had many more refineries or allowed for more exploration of offshore drilling and production, that wouldn’t in turn cause more hurricanes, which would then come along and ruin everything that was so perfectly designed by the progressives?
SCIENCE!, people.
Economic science.
Jesus. Does Kernan have Nobel Prizes in economics? No? Than he should probably just shut up and defer to people like Krugman. Who can prove their economic literacy by the very fact of their Nobel Prizes — much like Obama and Carter and Arafat can prove how goodly and kind and peaceful they are by trotting out their hardware.
Perception is reality.
Q-fucking-ED.
– More Commiewood skanks on parade.
– Now that Bummblefuck has his own flag and allegence, we should move them all to their own island Utopia.
Yup, more or less.
Look. There are an estimated quadrillion dollars in derivatives in the so-called market. The federal and state governments, combining recognized debt, redefined debt — called unfunded obligations — and pensions owe something around a quarter quadrillion dollars. Japan and the EU are each upside down another quadrillion apiece.
These are incomprehensibly large numbers. Know how many particles are estimated to be in the universe?
This is all because of fiat money, fractional reserve, algo-trading, lax regulators, speculation, and an infinitude of corruption, leveraging, financial “products”, manipulation, shady dealings, brinksmanship and on and on and on.
Of course the whole fucking thing is one giant tower of Jenga! Of course it’s all Ponzied! And of course it’s the single finest means to invent from thin air everything from wages to entitlements to value to profit — to churn out an entire national standard of living for as long as the wretched thing can stand.
Communism? In effect, it absolutely is: It is a pyramid of power operated against the common man’s wishes and property by those with no compunction whatsoever against taking as much as they want for as long as they can take it.
And by it you know we mean wealth and power.
Let’s start calling shit what it is.
Here the thing (since I am unable to follow JHoward, I’ll reroute things to a more level intellectual playing field for me):
Krugman, in private, is not necessarily the Keynesian on Adderall he portrays himself to be. I have met a series of people–all Dems, natch–who know the guy, personally and have socialized and discussed things off the record with him.
He is really big skeptic of unions and will talk about them at length. While he acknowledges their historical role in guaranteeing rights and safety, he is point blank in saying that they jack up costs, create legal snares and crush output and productivity in this age. There is nothing that a union can’t make worse, in other words..
He is also more pro wall Street than is supposed. He sees the need for a free and open marketplace, but (very correctly) reasons that the Too Big to Fail construct–a derivative of the Glass-Steagall repeal–has created a system of privatized rewards and public risks for a narrow cohort of market players. This is both unethical and inefficient, he has said.
These positions are not foreign to PW’ers, I argue. But the guy is such a down-for-the-team Dem hack, he never publicly leaves the plantation. Hell, even Larry kudlow does that some time.
JHo: by “unable to follow,” I meant your point was rich with deeply argued points. Mine was just passing reporter gossip.
I don’t know if this has been linked here already, but I just saw this video of Obama ’95 on Drudge. Veeerrryy interesting.
LBascom, you are a dirty dirty racist for posting Obama’s own words. Or existing and not being progressive. Whatevs.
It’s OK Darth, my own party calls me worse. These days being a racist merely means you don’t pledge allegiance to Obama. It’;s actually starting to be a point of pride.
Knuckle dragging ignoramus hobbit is just hurtful.
sorry, fat fingers…
Huge part of the problem, Roddy. I know for a fact that a lot of Washington insiders are chomping at the bit to vote for Romney so that the game keeps going… all the while attending Obama fundraisers.
But what’s another quadrillion between friends?
When sticking to theoretical research in economics, Krugman is rumored to be quite brilliant, but whenever he ventures into the public arena he is a drooling partisan lunatic.
I don’t think he is a communist, but he is a wannabe oligarch, and that’s more than bad enough.
So what you’re saying is he’s a witting useful idiot?
Ernst,
I suppose, yes.
Dick-weed: an unwanted growth proceeding from a dick.
Just sayin’…
From Lee’s video:
“I think that with the collapse of communism I think we recognize markets are gonna happen”
and
(Question to Obama) “Does that us include all of us (controlling markets) and if so what mechanisms for collective decision making will we use? Or does that us include those of us who own the media and other corportate entities
(Obama) A: I think that in the end it has to be uh, it does has to be uh, uh, uh a broad us, it has to be democracy with a small d”
Nice find Lee!!!
If the internal polls match the ones we’re seeing its darn time for Romney to make the Obama/Socialist connection and hammer it home.
I think we should pass it around as much as possible.
When are people going to start laughing at these people who say that the answer to an economic slump during a time of wildly profligate overspending is to overspend even more?
Laughing is all such suggestions merit. Even Nobel Laureates must show their work, and Krugman is just editorializing, not offering anything resembling backing analysis.