[Vision2020] Nobel Laureate Economist Krugman on Debt Deal:ThePresident Surrenders: "a catastrophe on multiple levels"

[lfalen]

If you do not think Will is qualified to debate Krugman, try Thomas Sowell. See his NRO blog on April 28.
Specificly I think Klugman is wrong at the points I have indicated in your original post. I think people lilke Sowell and Walter Washington  and Friedman have a better handle on economics than Krugman or Keynes.
-----Original message-----
From: Ted Moffett starbliss at gmail.com
Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2011 15:33:55 -0700
To: lfalen lfalen at turbonet.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Nobel Laureate Economist Krugman on Debt Deal:ThePresident Surrenders: "a catastrophe on multiple levels"

> Are you implying that Noble laureate economist Krugman, who I think
> represents the thinking of many democrats on debates regarding economic
> policy, does not  "debate reasonably?"
> 
> If he were addressing this list serve regarding economic policy,  the
> serious limitations in logic and fact displayed by some who pontificate on
> economics and politics would become glaringly apparent.
> 
> Which is not to say there are no reasonable grounds based on a in-depth
> knowledge of economics to disagree with Krugman.
> 
> But I don't think it fair to imply Krugman, and many democrats, do not
> "debate reasonably," that they display a surfeit
> of unreasonableness compared to those who identify as republican or tea
> party.
> 
> Furthermore, I do not think George Will possesses the academic competence in
> economic theory required to rebut Krugman.
> 
> He's no Milton Friedman, that's for sure!
> 
> A Krugman/ Friedman debate at this point in history regarding
> US economics would be a treat!
> 
> Is this the Krugman and Will discussion you are referring to?
>  Paul Krugman, George Will Spar About Debt Ceiling Deal On 'This Week'
> (VIDEO)
> 
> First Posted: 8/1/11 09:01 AM ET Updated: 8/1/11 09:25 AM ET
> 
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/01/paul-krugman-george-will-_n_914760html
> ---------------------------------------
> Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 11:35 AM, lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com> wrote:
> 
> > Krugman is wrong on almost all points except that it is a bad deal. Given
> > the make of congress is is probably the best that can be expected. The cut,
> > cap and balance bill would have been much  better. See George Will's
> > rebuttal. The Democrats do themselves a disservice by shouting jihad and
> > terrorist. Lets calm down and debate reasonably.
> > Roger
> >
> > -----Original message-----
> > From: Ted Moffett starbliss at gmail.com
> > Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2011 17:28:09 -0700
> > To: Moscow Vision 2020 vision2020 at moscow.com
> > Subject: [Vision2020] Nobel Laureate Economist Krugman on Debt Deal:
> > ThePresident Surrenders: "a catastrophe on multiple levels"
> >
> > >
> > http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/01/opinion/the-president-surrenders-on-debt-ceiling.html
> > >
> > > The President Surrenders By PAUL
> > > KRUGMAN<
> > http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/paulkrugman/index.html?inline=nyt-per
> > >
> >  > Published:
> > > July 31, 2011
> > > A deal to raise the federal debt ceiling is in the works. If it goes
> > > through, many commentators will declare that disaster was avoided. But
> > they
> > > will be wrong.
> > >
> > > For the deal itself, given the available information, is a disaster, and
> > not
> > > just for President Obama and his party. It will damage an already
> > depressed
> > > economy; it will probably make America’s long-run deficit problem worse,
> > not
> > > better;(me, this is wrong)

 and most important, by demonstrating that raw extortion works and
> > > carries no political cost, it will take America a long way down the road
> > to
> > > banana-republic status.( Roger - we are headed toward s banana republic if we allow the debt to sky rocket and do not control spending.)






> > >
> > > Start with the economics. We currently have a deeply depressed economy.
> > We
> > > will almost certainly continue to have a depressed economy all through
> > next
> > > year. And we will probably have a depressed economy through 2013 as well,
> > if
> > > not beyond.
> > >
> > > The worst thing you can do in these circumstances is slash government
> > > spending, since that will depress the economy even further. Pay no
> > attention
> > > to those who invoke the confidence fairy, claiming that tough action on
> > the
> > > budget will reassure businesses and consumers, leading them to spend
> > more.
> > > It doesn’t work that way, a fact confirmed by many studies of the
> > historical
> > > record.
> > >
> > > Indeed, slashing spending while the economy is depressed won’t even help
> > the
> > > budget situation much, and might well make it worse. On one side,
> > interest
> > > rates on federal borrowing are currently very low, so spending cuts now
> > will
> > > do little to reduce future interest costs. On the other side, making the
> > > economy weaker now will also hurt its long-run prospects, which will in
> > turn
> > > reduce future revenue. So those demanding spending cuts now are like
> > > medieval doctors who treated the sick by bleeding them, and thereby made
> > > them even sicker.
> > >
> > > And then there are the reported terms of the deal, which amount to an
> > abject
> > > surrender on the part of the president. First, there will be big spending
> > > cuts, with no increase in revenue. Then a panel will make recommendations
> > > for further deficit reduction — and if these recommendations aren’t
> > > accepted, there will be more spending cuts.
> > >
> > > Republicans will supposedly have an incentive to make concessions the
> > next
> > > time around, because defense spending will be among the areas cut. But
> > the
> > > G.O.P. has just demonstrated its willingness to risk financial collapse
> > > unless it gets everything its most extreme members want. Why expect it to
> > be
> > > more reasonable in the next round?
> > >
> > > In fact, Republicans will surely be emboldened by the way Mr. Obama keeps
> > > folding in the face of their threats. He surrendered last December,
> > > extending all the Bush tax cuts; he surrendered in the spring when they
> > > threatened to shut down the government; and he has now surrendered on a
> > > grand scale to raw extortion over the debt ceiling. Maybe it’s just me,
> > but
> > > I see a pattern here.
> > >
> > > Did the president have any alternative this time around? Yes.
> > >
> > > First of all, he could and should have demanded an
> > > increase<
> > http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/31/tax-cut-memories/?scp=1&sq=krugman%20conscience%20tax%20cut%20memories&st=cse
> > >in
> >  > the debt ceiling back in December. When asked why he didn’t, he
> > > replied
> > > that he was sure that Republicans would act responsibly. Great call.
> > >
> > > And even now, the Obama administration could have resorted to legal
> > > maneuvering to sidestep the debt ceiling, using any of several options.
> > In
> > > ordinary circumstances, this might have been an extreme step. But faced
> > with
> > > the reality of what is happening, namely raw extortion on the part of a
> > > party that, after all, only controls one house of Congress, it would have
> > > been totally justifiable.
> > >
> > > At the very least, Mr. Obama could have used the possibility of a legal
> > end
> > > run to strengthen his bargaining position. Instead, however, he ruled all
> > > such options out from the beginning.
> > >
> > > But wouldn’t taking a tough stance have worried markets? Probably not In
> > > fact, if I were an investor I would be reassured, not dismayed, by a
> > > demonstration that the president is willing and able to stand up to
> > > blackmail on the part of right-wing extremists. Instead, he has chosen to
> > > demonstrate the opposite.
> > >
> > > Make no mistake about it, what we’re witnessing here is a catastrophe on
> > > multiple levels.
> > >
> > > It is, of course, a political catastrophe for Democrats, who just a few
> > > weeks ago seemed to have Republicans on the run over their plan to
> > dismantle
> > > Medicare; now Mr. Obama has thrown all that away. And the damage isn’t
> > over:
> > > there will be more choke points where Republicans can threaten to create
> > a
> > > crisis unless the president surrenders, and they can now act with the
> > > confident expectation that he will.
> > >
> > > In the long run, however, Democrats won’t be the only losers. What
> > > Republicans have just gotten away with calls our whole system of
> > government
> > > into question. After all, how can American democracy work if whichever
> > party
> > > is most prepared to be ruthless, to threaten the nation’s economic
> > security,
> > > gets to dictate policy? And the answer is, maybe it can’t.
> > > ------------------------------------------
> > > Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett
> > >
> > >
> >
> 
>