Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › Paul Krugman has officially lost all credibility
- This topic has 205 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 1 month ago by
briansd1.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 13, 2009 at 8:06 AM #16486October 13, 2009 at 8:18 AM #467968
Rich ToscanoKeymasterKrugman lost credibility in 2004 when he chastised Greenspam for raising rates too soon. (Actually he probably lost credibility before that; I don’t read his column, but I happened to hear him an an interview in 04).
He is the standard-bearer for analysts who think there is no consequence to massive indebtedness and money printing.
Rich
October 13, 2009 at 8:18 AM #468151Rich ToscanoKeymasterKrugman lost credibility in 2004 when he chastised Greenspam for raising rates too soon. (Actually he probably lost credibility before that; I don’t read his column, but I happened to hear him an an interview in 04).
He is the standard-bearer for analysts who think there is no consequence to massive indebtedness and money printing.
Rich
October 13, 2009 at 8:18 AM #468509Rich ToscanoKeymasterKrugman lost credibility in 2004 when he chastised Greenspam for raising rates too soon. (Actually he probably lost credibility before that; I don’t read his column, but I happened to hear him an an interview in 04).
He is the standard-bearer for analysts who think there is no consequence to massive indebtedness and money printing.
Rich
October 13, 2009 at 8:18 AM #468581Rich ToscanoKeymasterKrugman lost credibility in 2004 when he chastised Greenspam for raising rates too soon. (Actually he probably lost credibility before that; I don’t read his column, but I happened to hear him an an interview in 04).
He is the standard-bearer for analysts who think there is no consequence to massive indebtedness and money printing.
Rich
October 13, 2009 at 8:18 AM #468793Rich ToscanoKeymasterKrugman lost credibility in 2004 when he chastised Greenspam for raising rates too soon. (Actually he probably lost credibility before that; I don’t read his column, but I happened to hear him an an interview in 04).
He is the standard-bearer for analysts who think there is no consequence to massive indebtedness and money printing.
Rich
October 13, 2009 at 8:43 AM #467983ucodegen
ParticipantSome of Krugmans statements may be true, but unfortunately it is like the saying about a broken clock..
October 13, 2009 at 8:43 AM #468166ParticipantSome of Krugmans statements may be true, but unfortunately it is like the saying about a broken clock..
October 13, 2009 at 8:43 AM #468524ParticipantSome of Krugmans statements may be true, but unfortunately it is like the saying about a broken clock..
October 13, 2009 at 8:43 AM #468595ParticipantSome of Krugmans statements may be true, but unfortunately it is like the saying about a broken clock..
October 13, 2009 at 8:43 AM #468808ParticipantSome of Krugmans statements may be true, but unfortunately it is like the saying about a broken clock..
October 13, 2009 at 9:41 AM #468048urbanrealtor
Participant[quote=Rich Toscano]Krugman lost credibility in 2004 when he chastised Greenspam for raising rates too soon. (Actually he probably lost credibility before that; I don’t read his column, but I happened to hear him an an interview in 04).
He is the standard-bearer for analysts who think there is no consequence to massive indebtedness and money printing.
Rich[/quote]
Yeah?
See I did not see that in what he has written.
Though it is true I have not read all of it.It seems more like he has said that consequences are more complicated than much of the contemporary hype.
Specifically, he seems to not be averse to a dollar that is internationally weaker and unconcerned about inflation when money supply increase is coupled with a stagnant per capita GDP and increasing unemployment (and thus less effective demand).
While I have mixed feelings about the first assertion, I don’t see anything terribly non-credible about saying that inflation is more dependent upon spending than printing.
Increasing one’s monetary base is of dubious relevance if all the new base is doing is sitting in reserve accounts.
Maybe I am wrong but I don’t see loads of extra cash (a la 2005) floating around and doing a demand-pull on prices.
Still not sure about the international component.
October 13, 2009 at 9:41 AM #468230Participant[quote=Rich Toscano]Krugman lost credibility in 2004 when he chastised Greenspam for raising rates too soon. (Actually he probably lost credibility before that; I don’t read his column, but I happened to hear him an an interview in 04).
He is the standard-bearer for analysts who think there is no consequence to massive indebtedness and money printing.
Rich[/quote]
Yeah?
See I did not see that in what he has written.
Though it is true I have not read all of it.It seems more like he has said that consequences are more complicated than much of the contemporary hype.
Specifically, he seems to not be averse to a dollar that is internationally weaker and unconcerned about inflation when money supply increase is coupled with a stagnant per capita GDP and increasing unemployment (and thus less effective demand).
While I have mixed feelings about the first assertion, I don’t see anything terribly non-credible about saying that inflation is more dependent upon spending than printing.
Increasing one’s monetary base is of dubious relevance if all the new base is doing is sitting in reserve accounts.
Maybe I am wrong but I don’t see loads of extra cash (a la 2005) floating around and doing a demand-pull on prices.
Still not sure about the international component.
October 13, 2009 at 9:41 AM #468589Participant[quote=Rich Toscano]Krugman lost credibility in 2004 when he chastised Greenspam for raising rates too soon. (Actually he probably lost credibility before that; I don’t read his column, but I happened to hear him an an interview in 04).
He is the standard-bearer for analysts who think there is no consequence to massive indebtedness and money printing.
Rich[/quote]
Yeah?
See I did not see that in what he has written.
Though it is true I have not read all of it.It seems more like he has said that consequences are more complicated than much of the contemporary hype.
Specifically, he seems to not be averse to a dollar that is internationally weaker and unconcerned about inflation when money supply increase is coupled with a stagnant per capita GDP and increasing unemployment (and thus less effective demand).
While I have mixed feelings about the first assertion, I don’t see anything terribly non-credible about saying that inflation is more dependent upon spending than printing.
Increasing one’s monetary base is of dubious relevance if all the new base is doing is sitting in reserve accounts.
Maybe I am wrong but I don’t see loads of extra cash (a la 2005) floating around and doing a demand-pull on prices.
Still not sure about the international component.
October 13, 2009 at 9:41 AM #468661Participant[quote=Rich Toscano]Krugman lost credibility in 2004 when he chastised Greenspam for raising rates too soon. (Actually he probably lost credibility before that; I don’t read his column, but I happened to hear him an an interview in 04).
He is the standard-bearer for analysts who think there is no consequence to massive indebtedness and money printing.
Rich[/quote]
Yeah?
See I did not see that in what he has written.
Though it is true I have not read all of it.It seems more like he has said that consequences are more complicated than much of the contemporary hype.
Specifically, he seems to not be averse to a dollar that is internationally weaker and unconcerned about inflation when money supply increase is coupled with a stagnant per capita GDP and increasing unemployment (and thus less effective demand).
While I have mixed feelings about the first assertion, I don’t see anything terribly non-credible about saying that inflation is more dependent upon spending than printing.
Increasing one’s monetary base is of dubious relevance if all the new base is doing is sitting in reserve accounts.
Maybe I am wrong but I don’t see loads of extra cash (a la 2005) floating around and doing a demand-pull on prices.
Still not sure about the international component.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.