[EconProf]

If we can step down from the anger we all feel from the bubble and its inevitable popping, there may be a degree of resolution and, almost, justice in this outcome.
It’s been said that the whole mania involved stupid lenders making stupid loans to stupid people. Here the borrower is going to suffer since he is coughing up a lot of money from foolishly buying into the bubble mentality and is presumably a net loser even after paying only 25% of his 2d. The foolish lender will really take a haircut, and we piggs are happy to see he presumably did not sell the loan. And if he bought it from the originator he still deserves his fate for lack of due diligence.
Correct me if I am wrong, but don’t see any taxpayer money involved here. It is just possible that the guilty/foolish parties are the losers.

[EconProf]

If we can step down from the anger we all feel from the bubble and its inevitable popping, there may be a degree of resolution and, almost, justice in this outcome.
It’s been said that the whole mania involved stupid lenders making stupid loans to stupid people. Here the borrower is going to suffer since he is coughing up a lot of money from foolishly buying into the bubble mentality and is presumably a net loser even after paying only 25% of his 2d. The foolish lender will really take a haircut, and we piggs are happy to see he presumably did not sell the loan. And if he bought it from the originator he still deserves his fate for lack of due diligence.
Correct me if I am wrong, but don’t see any taxpayer money involved here. It is just possible that the guilty/foolish parties are the losers.

[EconProf]

If we can step down from the anger we all feel from the bubble and its inevitable popping, there may be a degree of resolution and, almost, justice in this outcome.
It’s been said that the whole mania involved stupid lenders making stupid loans to stupid people. Here the borrower is going to suffer since he is coughing up a lot of money from foolishly buying into the bubble mentality and is presumably a net loser even after paying only 25% of his 2d. The foolish lender will really take a haircut, and we piggs are happy to see he presumably did not sell the loan. And if he bought it from the originator he still deserves his fate for lack of due diligence.
Correct me if I am wrong, but don’t see any taxpayer money involved here. It is just possible that the guilty/foolish parties are the losers.

[EconProf]

If we can step down from the anger we all feel from the bubble and its inevitable popping, there may be a degree of resolution and, almost, justice in this outcome.
It’s been said that the whole mania involved stupid lenders making stupid loans to stupid people. Here the borrower is going to suffer since he is coughing up a lot of money from foolishly buying into the bubble mentality and is presumably a net loser even after paying only 25% of his 2d. The foolish lender will really take a haircut, and we piggs are happy to see he presumably did not sell the loan. And if he bought it from the originator he still deserves his fate for lack of due diligence.
Correct me if I am wrong, but don’t see any taxpayer money involved here. It is just possible that the guilty/foolish parties are the losers.

[EconProf]

This is why it is ALWAYS important, when considering a place to buy, to visit at odd hours, weekends, etc., and talk to the neighbors. Ask about neighborhood nuisances, how they like the place, traffic noise, crime, presence of kids, dogs, etc. You will learn more in five minutes than any amount of time spent doing other kinds of research. Also, you will see and evaluate first-hand your potential neighbors.

[EconProf]

This is why it is ALWAYS important, when considering a place to buy, to visit at odd hours, weekends, etc., and talk to the neighbors. Ask about neighborhood nuisances, how they like the place, traffic noise, crime, presence of kids, dogs, etc. You will learn more in five minutes than any amount of time spent doing other kinds of research. Also, you will see and evaluate first-hand your potential neighbors.

[EconProf]

This is why it is ALWAYS important, when considering a place to buy, to visit at odd hours, weekends, etc., and talk to the neighbors. Ask about neighborhood nuisances, how they like the place, traffic noise, crime, presence of kids, dogs, etc. You will learn more in five minutes than any amount of time spent doing other kinds of research. Also, you will see and evaluate first-hand your potential neighbors.

[EconProf]

This is why it is ALWAYS important, when considering a place to buy, to visit at odd hours, weekends, etc., and talk to the neighbors. Ask about neighborhood nuisances, how they like the place, traffic noise, crime, presence of kids, dogs, etc. You will learn more in five minutes than any amount of time spent doing other kinds of research. Also, you will see and evaluate first-hand your potential neighbors.

[EconProf]

This is why it is ALWAYS important, when considering a place to buy, to visit at odd hours, weekends, etc., and talk to the neighbors. Ask about neighborhood nuisances, how they like the place, traffic noise, crime, presence of kids, dogs, etc. You will learn more in five minutes than any amount of time spent doing other kinds of research. Also, you will see and evaluate first-hand your potential neighbors.

[EconProf]

Larry Summers is one of too many economists that seem to succeed despite their dreadful record of accomplishments. (Another is Lester Thurow, who a lapdog media interviewed incessantly because he was telegenic, exuded confidence, smilled a lot, but was consistently wrong in his forecasts).
Yes, Summers was colosally wrong in his investment record and forecast, and had to be involved in telling Obama last March the unemployment rate would not exceed 8% if only the stimulus bill is passed. He also criticized Bush II in an academic paper some years ago for extending unemployment benefits. Said doing so actually worsens unemployment because it encourages some on the margin to become picky and turn down job offers (true BTW–economists are agreed on this).
So what Summers-advised administration is now extending unemployment benefits to (I believe) the longest in history at 78 weeks? Obama’s.
I just wish journalists and editors would keep track of economist’s stands and forecasts and start elevating those who have proven correct and ignor those with a dismal record.

[EconProf]

Larry Summers is one of too many economists that seem to succeed despite their dreadful record of accomplishments. (Another is Lester Thurow, who a lapdog media interviewed incessantly because he was telegenic, exuded confidence, smilled a lot, but was consistently wrong in his forecasts).
Yes, Summers was colosally wrong in his investment record and forecast, and had to be involved in telling Obama last March the unemployment rate would not exceed 8% if only the stimulus bill is passed. He also criticized Bush II in an academic paper some years ago for extending unemployment benefits. Said doing so actually worsens unemployment because it encourages some on the margin to become picky and turn down job offers (true BTW–economists are agreed on this).
So what Summers-advised administration is now extending unemployment benefits to (I believe) the longest in history at 78 weeks? Obama’s.
I just wish journalists and editors would keep track of economist’s stands and forecasts and start elevating those who have proven correct and ignor those with a dismal record.

[EconProf]

Larry Summers is one of too many economists that seem to succeed despite their dreadful record of accomplishments. (Another is Lester Thurow, who a lapdog media interviewed incessantly because he was telegenic, exuded confidence, smilled a lot, but was consistently wrong in his forecasts).
Yes, Summers was colosally wrong in his investment record and forecast, and had to be involved in telling Obama last March the unemployment rate would not exceed 8% if only the stimulus bill is passed. He also criticized Bush II in an academic paper some years ago for extending unemployment benefits. Said doing so actually worsens unemployment because it encourages some on the margin to become picky and turn down job offers (true BTW–economists are agreed on this).
So what Summers-advised administration is now extending unemployment benefits to (I believe) the longest in history at 78 weeks? Obama’s.
I just wish journalists and editors would keep track of economist’s stands and forecasts and start elevating those who have proven correct and ignor those with a dismal record.

[EconProf]

Larry Summers is one of too many economists that seem to succeed despite their dreadful record of accomplishments. (Another is Lester Thurow, who a lapdog media interviewed incessantly because he was telegenic, exuded confidence, smilled a lot, but was consistently wrong in his forecasts).
Yes, Summers was colosally wrong in his investment record and forecast, and had to be involved in telling Obama last March the unemployment rate would not exceed 8% if only the stimulus bill is passed. He also criticized Bush II in an academic paper some years ago for extending unemployment benefits. Said doing so actually worsens unemployment because it encourages some on the margin to become picky and turn down job offers (true BTW–economists are agreed on this).
So what Summers-advised administration is now extending unemployment benefits to (I believe) the longest in history at 78 weeks? Obama’s.
I just wish journalists and editors would keep track of economist’s stands and forecasts and start elevating those who have proven correct and ignor those with a dismal record.

[EconProf]

Larry Summers is one of too many economists that seem to succeed despite their dreadful record of accomplishments. (Another is Lester Thurow, who a lapdog media interviewed incessantly because he was telegenic, exuded confidence, smilled a lot, but was consistently wrong in his forecasts).
Yes, Summers was colosally wrong in his investment record and forecast, and had to be involved in telling Obama last March the unemployment rate would not exceed 8% if only the stimulus bill is passed. He also criticized Bush II in an academic paper some years ago for extending unemployment benefits. Said doing so actually worsens unemployment because it encourages some on the margin to become picky and turn down job offers (true BTW–economists are agreed on this).
So what Summers-advised administration is now extending unemployment benefits to (I believe) the longest in history at 78 weeks? Obama’s.
I just wish journalists and editors would keep track of economist’s stands and forecasts and start elevating those who have proven correct and ignor those with a dismal record.

[EconProf]

Government subsidies for private businesses are almost never justified. The competing firms who do not get the same favoritism are unfairly hurt. Usually, the company getting the subsidy gets lazy and sloppy, but they are propped up by the taxpayer, thus misallocating resources.
Should the government have subsidized buggy-whip makers a century ago? A lot of good people lost their jobs as their companies went under. Today’s politicians would have saved them!

[Author]

Posts