Krugman
Related searches: krugman | krugman depression | krugman new york times | krugman inflation | krugman wells
News and information about Krugman
President has proved stimulus doubters wrong; now he must think big, be bold and do it all over again, writes PAUL KRUGMAN NEXT WEEK, president Barack Obama is scheduled to propose new measures to boost the ...
While they are at it take Paul Krugman and all the other geniuses who call themselves economists with them. Thank God Christina Romer will head back to that great liberal theme park, Berkeley, where the only damage ...
It was obvious from the beginning that it was too small," said economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman . "He clearly needs more, the economy needs more. We need a real effort to get the economy moving."
Paul Krugman has calculated that the increased costs of Social Security over the next two decades are "significantly smaller... than the rise in defense spending since 2001." http://theweek.com/... The truth,
A week ago economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman urged the Fed to be bolder, warning of the somber consequences of "waiting for a recovery to happen all by itself." The debate is going on inside the Fed,
Harvard professor] Kenneth Rogoff is proposing that the United States use a burst of inflation to get out of its slump," writes Princeton professor Paul Krugman. "I agree...[but] if central banks can gain any ...
Paul Krugman, as it happens, got his big break at Slate, which isn't that far off. Now that there are forums for people who aren't professional writers to do public writing, we're finding that some of those people ...
Finally, to add insult to injury, this massive debt that the government is accumulating will not be paid by Krugman’s children (nor their children) as it will by those of you who do have children. You see, A-Paul ...
including Paul Krugman, agree that last year’s stimulus was too small to turn around the struggling economy. 5. And Alameda Fire Chief David Kapler, who came under fire for fueling his private car for free at a ...
Blog posts about Krugman
Paul Krugman writes on his blog: Krugman writes: "Whenever the issue of fiscal stimulus comes up, you can count on someone chiming in to say, 'Only a moron could believe that the answer to a problem created by too much debt is to create ...
Why Americans Should Trust Krugman and Bernanke. NIA's VisionVictory just posted a new must see video discussing how mainstream economists believe inflation is the solution and we need more stimulus. Please watch this video immediately ...
Someone else thinks like us and not one of the worst economists out there: Paul Krugman. The Nobel prize winner still believes in the use of monetary policy though. In a must read paper called Japan's trap, Paul sketched out a model ...
I love the Obamaesque narcissism contained within Krugman's admission that “I wanted to be a psychohistorian, saving civilization through the mathematics of human behavior” — it's his personal equivalent of the hoary cliche of newspaper ...
Had I not seen Paul Krugman on GMA, I wouldn't have believed this. Do the Dems running for re-election have a death-wish? http://dyn.politico.com/membe.
Every time I consider re-posting one of Paul Krugman's columns lately, I confront a dilemma that makes me hesitate. Almost all of them have been on-target, illuminating, and indispensable ... so if I start highlighting some of them, ...
Krugman is laying the groundwork for more stimulus. He insists that what was already spent was insufficient, even though it was greater than the cost of the seven years we spent in Iraq. This is nothing new. He has insisted all along ...
By Kevin Mooney — Whatever voters may think of former President George W. Bush these days, they think very highly of their disposable income, cost of living and bank accounts. That's why it's smart politically for Republicans to call ...
The stimulus wasn't big enough. It wasn't big enough because Republicans (what else is new) wouldn't accept a large stimulus. They didn't want a stimulus.
Yes, I am familiar with the diagrams included in an earlier posting, but Krugman seems to be implying that had the government run a three-trillion-dollar-plus deficit last year, that our economy would be in fine shape today. ...
Obama is not much bettter as he has implemented a failed economic model as both Reich and Krugman explain. Obama is a combo of center right, center, and occasionally center left. Obama is far from a liberal but has allowed the right to ...
Krugman: We need another stimulus. The administration ignored him the first time, and they'll ignore him again this time. And we may lose the House, and thus most of everything else we expected from this administration, as a result: ...
Krugman's fighting a losing battle though and the sad thing is that he and other center-left economists are actually the enablers of the irreconcilable dilemma. Their insistence that debt matters provide no cover for a center-left party ...
Rolnick: For example, by Paul Krugman in the New York Times and Lord Robert Skidelsky in the Economist and elsewhere. You were a visiting professor at Princeton in the spring of 2009. Along with Alan Blinder, Nobuhiro Kiyotaki and Chris ...
Krugman products
Krugman forum posts
Krugman events
Last Four Lectures Subscription 4:00Subscription to lectures by P. J. O'Rourke on February 5, 2011, Zbigniew Brzezinski on February 26, 2011, Gwen Ifill on March 19, 2011, and Paul Krugman on April 9, 2011. Saturday, January 15, 2011 at 4:00 PMThe Emerson Center 1590 27th Ave Vero Beach, FL 32960 Phone: (772) 778-5249 E-Mail: info@theemersoncenter.org
Last Four Lectures Subscription 7:00Last Four Lectures Subscription 7:00Subscription to lectures by P. J. O'Rourke on February 5, 2011, Zbigniew Brzezinski on February 26, 2011, Gwen Ifill on March 19, 2011, and Paul Krugman on April 9, 2011. Saturday, January 15, 2011 at 7:00 PMThe Emerson Center 1590 27th Ave Vero Beach, FL 32960 Phone: (772) 778-5249 E-Mail: info@theemersoncenter.org
All Five Lectures Subscription 7:00All Five Lectures Subscription 7:00Subscription to lectures by Peggy Noonan on January 15, 2011, P. J. O"Rourke on February 5, 2011, Zbigniew Brzezinski on February 26, 2011, Gwen Ifill on March 19, 2011, and Paul Krugman on April 9, 2011. Saturday, January 15, 2011 at 7:00 PMThe Emerson Center 1590 27th Ave Vero Beach, FL 32960 Phone: (772) 778-5249 E-Mail: info@theemersoncenter.org
Krugman questions & answers
"In a New York Times op-ed column, economist Paul Krugman, wrote that "the tea parties don't represent a spontaneous outpouring of public sentiment. They're AstroTurf (fake grass roots) events, manufactured by the usual suspects. In particular, a key role is being played by FreedomWorks, an organization run by Richard Armey." this would make sense...obama just cut taxes to 95% of all americans...u think these tea people would be thanking them
Answer: The Beck T.P.,yes, definitely, by calling out for religious backing. It has become a gathering of sheep and greed.
Tea partiers: did it bother you when Reagan tripled the national debt? Why did it triple?
Personally, I'm not happy that either Reagan or Obama is increasing the national debt. But where were you guys when this happened? And why do you think it tripled? Sure, Reagan had a Dem Congress, but so did every president from Eisenhower to Carter, and each one of them lowered the national debt as a share of GDP. http://blogs.usask.ca/the_bolt/images/usa_debt_gdp_new.gif Do you think it happened because Reagan lowered the top marginal tax rate from 70% to 28%, and dipped into social security to offset the loss of revenue? Tax revenue during Reagan rose over the 8 years, but only because of inflation/population. Tax revenue increased even more from 1972-1980, and by a LOT more during Clinton. http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/17/reagan-and-revenue/ @garyb 4% unemployment? Not during Reagan: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c3/Us_unemployment_rates_1950_2005.png It was higher during Reagan at this point in Reagan's presidency (1.5 years into the presidency, it was over 10%), despite the fact that he was coming off a much more mild recession. @Socrates Yes, two main reasons. The first is that a sheer dollar amount gives no indication of inflation. The second is that I was too lazy to look it up, especially because of the first reason.
Answer: The senile moron known as Reagan is the biggest joke to be elected to the office of president next to Bush. Republicans play with history, and cover up their failure by portraying him as some American hero that single handedly brought down the Soviet Union.
Can we afford to extend the Bush era tax cuts?
They have already costs bill hundreds of billions. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/jun/24/paul-krugman/bush-tax-cuts-health-care-probably/ http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-06/no-free-lunch-for-americans-as-deficits-bedevil-backers-of-bush-s-tax-cuts.html
Answer: We can't afford NOT to.
Do you find Paul Krugman to be merely a partisan political hack and not a serious "economist."?
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2010/08/krugman-is-wrong-on-ryan-and-the-cbo/61110/ The Atlantic is a lefty magazine.
Answer: No. Oh and, right, I am so very concerned about whether the JCT, not the CBO, typically handles the official scoring of tax legislation. Please!
Once hyperinflation & the great collapse occurs will Democrats then admit they were wrong or blame Bush, again?
I don't mean to scare anyone, but the facts are we have stagnant economic growth and just like FDR did in 1937 Obama is ready to raise taxes to "balance the budget" and history shows us that throws whatever recovery there is back into recession. Now when anything goes wrong the first words out of Obama administration is "Bush's fault". When Democrats lost Kennedy's former Senate seat in Democrat stronghold of Massachusetts Obama himself said it's Bush's Fault. "the same anger ... last 8 years ... elected Scott Brown". We inherited" is also their excuse. What's funny is when they ask do people want to go back to the Bush economic era - under 5% unemployment (averaged 5%) and a budget deficit a fraction of Obama's - YES WE DO. SO DEMOCRATS ADMIT ERROR OR WILL THE 2011 ECONOMIC DOWNTURN ALSO BE BLAMED ON GEORGE W. BUSH? http://www.shadowstats.com/article/hyperinflation-2010 http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/11/16/krugman-raising-taxes-worsened-depression-ok-now
Answer: So you actually agree that Obama shouldn't be worrying about balancing the budget right now?! I think you're right. The economy is still fragile, and the only way to get it growing again is ANOTHER stimulus package, since the first was obviously too small.
Other than Reagan appointee greenspan keeping interest rates low, how did the govt. cause the housing bubble?
"2008 Nobel Prize in Economics winner Paul Krugman states that the notion "has been refuted up, down, and sideways."[104] He also noted in November 2009 that 55% of commercial real estate loans were currently underwater, despite being completely unaffected by the CRA.[105] According to San Francisco Federal Reserve Bank Governor Randall Kroszner, the claim that "the law pushed banking institutions to undertake high-risk mortgage lending" was contrary to their experience, and that no empirical evidence had been presented to support the claim.[100] In a Bank for International Settlements (BIS) working paper, economist Luci Ellis concluded that "there is no evidence that the Community Reinvestment Act was responsible for encouraging the subprime lending boom and subsequent housing bust", relying partly on evidence that the housing bust has been a largely exurban event.[106] Others have also concluded that the CRA did not contribute to the financial crisis, for example, FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair,[101] Comptroller of the Currency John C. Dugan,[107] Tim Westrich of the Center for American Progress,[108] Robert Gordon of the American Prospect,[109] Ellen Seidman of the New America Foundation,[110] Daniel Gross of Slate,[111] and Aaron Pressman from BusinessWeek.[112]" Furthermore, if any conservative can actually explain how fannie mae caused it, be my guest. Ashley Jade: Explain @conservacunt: Then care to explain why milton friedman got a nobel prize?
Answer: Add President Clinton to the long list of people who deserve a share of the blame for the housing bubble and bust. A recently re-exposed document shows that his administration went to ridiculous lengths to increase the national homeownership rate. It promoted paper-thin downpayments and pushed for ways to get lenders to give mortgage loans to first-time buyers with shaky financing and incomes. It’s clear now that the erosion of lending standards pushed prices up by increasing demand, and later led to waves of defaults by people who never should have bought a home in the first place. President Bush continued the practices because they dovetailed with his Ownership Society goals, and of course Congress was strongly behind the push. But Clinton and his administration must shoulder some of the blame. In writing this blog entry, I’m following the lead of Joseph R. Mason, who is a finance professor at Drexel University’s LeBow College of Business, a senior fellow at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, and a consultant at Criterion Economics. Here is a link to a piece that he wrote on Feb. 26. The Clinton-era document that Mason cites—“The National Homeownership Strategy: Partners in the American Dream”—was hiding in plain sight on the website of the Department of Housing & Urban Development until last year, when according to Mason it was removed (probably because the housing bust made it seem embarrassing to the department). Mason credits Joshua Rosner of Graham Fisher & Co. with saving a copy of it before it was expunged. The National Homeownership Strategy began in 1994 when Clinton directed HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros to come up with a plan, and Cisneros convened what HUD called a "historic meeting" of private and public housing-industry organizations in August 1994. The group eventually produced a plan, of which Mason sent me a PDF of Chapter 4, the one that argues for creative measures to promote homeownership. The very worst idea in the plan, which fortunately never gained approval, was to let first-time homebuyers freely tap their IRA and 401(k) retirement-savings plans with no penalty to scrounge up a downpayment. That, HUD estimated, would have "benefited" 600,000 families in the first five years. "" For many potential homebuyers, the lack of cash available to accumulate the required downpayment and closing costs is the major impediment to purchasing a home. Other households do not have sufficient available income to to make the monthly payments on mortgages financed at market interest rates for standard loan terms. Financing strategies, fueled by the creativity and resources of the private and public sectors, should address both of these financial barriers to homeownership. Note the praise for "creativity." That kind of creativity in stretching boundaries we could use less of. Mason puts it well: "It strikes me as reckless to promote home sales to individuals in such constrained financial predicaments."
Who is currently the best economist(s) in the business?
(BTW, Krugman is one of the worst.) I just want your opinions. Just want to know what people think.
Answer: Walter E. Williams. He sometimes substitutes for Rush Limbaugh.
Why do liberals admire Pual Krugman so much?
This guy is a dangerous kool-aid drinker.
Answer: An internationally respected graduate of Yale, Professor of Economics at Princeton University, Centenary Professor of Economics at The London School of Economics, a Nobel Prize laureate ... what's not to admire ... ? Cons admire and believe every word of the 'geniuses' on FAUX ... Limbaugh [did not complete high school] and Beck [Sehome High School] ... !
anybody ready for more BERNANKE/ KRUGMAN PUMPING ACTION?
So what’s needed now is for the government to deliver on its promise and create another Krugman Special house-price bubble. I reckon $100,000 tax breaks should do the trick, say 10 million homeowners went for that scheme (make it a limited time offer to get some enthusiasm going), that would “only” cost $1 trillion or so. That’s about how much it costs to have a decent sized war these days, so in the grand scheme of things, that’s peanuts; and I’m pretty sure if Americans could chose between the “safety” that they might personally achieve by USA continuing to wage the so far inconclusive War on Terror, or take a risk on “security” and go with $100,000 tax breaks, they would say “Show Me The Money”. What I don’t understand is what Krugman is proposing to do with the other $9 trillion? The other way to look at it is that the best way for poor people to climb up the ladder to home ownership, is for house prices to be relatively low (rather than offering them debt that they can’t possibly service to buy expensive housing). On top of that, when so much of a countries cost base is devoted to paying-off debt on insanely high house prices; that robs productive capability from elsewhere. As Marc Faber once pointed out bubbles suck money and resources from productive parts of the economy, they suck out jobs too, those go to places where it’s cheaper to live and operate. So far, since the “reality check” that creating a housing-bubble should probably not be called “productive” economic “value-added”, a total of three million American families have been physically kicked out of their homes. By my calculation there are another three million to go, unless “someone” does something.
Answer: Sounds like a queer porno.
Do you think people in the U.S.A live better than rich Europeans countries?
I have posted this question a couple of times and I always get the same nonsense answer, but I understand, is all a matter of been proud where you from, nationalism. First, I'm a political refugee, unlike most people who live in the usa, you either an immigrant or your family came here for economy reasons like most hispanics and others. What does statistics say, many of rich Europeans countries, their way of life is much better than the U.S.A. Depression and Anxiety, I'm sure that is way higher here than those Europeans countries where life is more relax. Its funny how many people think here, most workers here are a bunch of slaves, that only have a couple of weeks of vacation and they think thats great,, this is funny, millions of people without health insurance, no jobs, 40 percent of the population living pay check to pay check, and you still think that this is such a great country, I have to say,,it was a great country, some family members and friends became millionares back in the 60's and 70's. Some of you say,,,hey ,,why don,t you move to Europe, I tell you...I got family here, but I wish,,,and you wish,,you were living in a country like Luxembourg, that has about less than one million people, they have the highest per capita in the world. I remember a bunch of college kids, they were laughing at this country for not having free school and health care....yeah,,they pay more taxes...but they can get sick,,any time of the day,,,they are covered...here..you wait for the bill......according to statistics, people in Canada live better than here, look at their unemployment, probably 8 percent,,,here is around 20%, according to Paul Krugman, Roubini, Stieglitz...,,,all these economist.. someone answered a previous question that I posted, asking the same...he said it best, average joe live better in Sweden, Denmark, Switzerland, etc....You all wish you were living like those Europeans... Briana...jajajaja...you are funny,,,people here have more depression..and anxiety,,,only americans think that live here is really good,,,people that have lived in rich Europeans countries,,and even canada...know that you are 100% wrong..
Answer: I don't know. Although the US has many problems, it's still a great country to live in. Many Europeans continue to move there in hopes of living the "American Dream". I live in Canada and I'm extremely happy here. We seem to do well when it comes to statistics but those aren't always accurate. Plus, not all European countries are places you'd want to live. You're comparing a continent to a country which is somewhat unfair to the US. You are right though. Americans do seem to lead a fast paced life which causes anxiety and depression. You guys need to relax and enjoy life a little more.