Krugman, Flimflam, And Defending Paul Ryan…

Krugman, Nobel? Head scratcher...

Paul Krugman (my aptly named dumbest Nobel Laureate in history) never fails to impress by his stupidity.

On August 5th, Krugman had an editorial titled “The Flimflam Man”, regarding Paul Ryan and his Roadmap for America.  You can read it here, if you wish, but point by point I plan on showing how ridiculous and political Krugman is in his analysis.

1.  “Mr. Ryan isn’t offering fresh food for thought; he’s serving up leftovers from the 1990s, drenched in flimflam sauce.”

The ridiculous of this statement is profound.  Why?  Krugman and other Keynesian economists criticize Ryan for coming up with economic ideas that created one of the greatest economic booms ever, with over 20 million jobs created.

Instead, Krugman would like us to follow not a plan from a decade ago…but a failed plan from 80 years ago…that being FDR’s response to the Great Depression.  Krugman thinks Obama’s stimulus was too small, and that is why we are having anemic growth.  Again, Krugman proves his complete and utter lack of understanding reality.  Obama’s stimulus did not fail because it was too small; it failed because there was nothing in the bill that would stimulate private sector growth.  People forget that in FDR’s first and second terms, there was little private sector growth outside of direct funding from the government.  It was only after the ‘stimulus’ of World War II did we get the private sector boom.  History tells us exactly why the Obama/Krugman economic policies are failing.

2.  “Mr. Ryan’s plan calls for steep cuts in both spending and taxes. He’d have you believe that the combined effect would be much lower budget deficits, and, according to that Washington Post report, he speaks about deficits “in apocalyptic terms.” And The Post also tells us that his plan would, indeed, sharply reduce the flow of red ink: “The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that Rep. Paul Ryan’s plan would cut the budget deficit in half by 2020. But the budget office has done no such thing. At Mr. Ryan’s request, it produced an estimate of the budget effects of his proposed spending cuts — period. It didn’t address the revenue losses from his tax cuts.”

Whether this is true or not, no one knows.  But Mr. Krugman is playing a shell game here.  When he was discussing the Obamacare bill, he specifically used the CBO numbers, which made similar assumptions regarding that bill as they did regarding Ryan’s bill.  If Mr. Krugman would prefer to use another entity to use as the gold standard, fine.  But after establishing the rules of debate, now he conveniently wants to move the goalposts.  That is a sign of a weak intellect.

3.  “Finally, let’s talk about those spending cuts. In its first decade, most of the alleged savings in the Ryan plan come from assuming zero dollar growth in domestic discretionary spending, which includes everything from energy policy to education to the court system. This would amount to a 25 percent cut once you adjust for inflation and population growth. How would such a severe cut be achieved? What specific programs would be slashed? Mr. Ryan doesn’t say.”

This is the crux of the matter for Krugman.  He does not want any cuts in government spending…almost ever.  You either believe in government cuts or you don’t.  People like Krugman believe every government program is sacrosanct, because it is ‘doing good’.  Conservatives simply believe there is only so much you can do within your means.

Krugman then asks for specific programs that Ryan would cut…knowing that he would attack Ryan on those specifics as well.  Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

Ultimately, what you see is that it is Krugman, and not Ryan, that is the flimflam artist.  Krugman provides no answer to economic growth other than out of control deficit spending, while at the same time criticizing serious men having serious discussions about the way forward.  For Krugman, the government is simply the only entity that can restore America’s wealth.  Conservatives such as Ryan simply believe otherwise, and that the people of this country will benefit more from utilizing their own wealth in their own deemed ways.

Again, Krugman proves his bias, and frankly, his utter stupidity, without adding anything to the national discourse.

7 thoughts on “Krugman, Flimflam, And Defending Paul Ryan…

  • August 6, 2010 at 6:31 am

    Krugman wrote:
    But the budget office has done no such thing. At Mr. Ryan’s request, it produced an estimate of the budget effects of his proposed spending cuts — period. It didn’t address the revenue losses from his tax cuts.”

    And you responded:
    Whether this is true or not, no one knows. But Mr. Krugman is playing a shell game here. When he was discussing the Obamacare bill, he specifically used the CBO numbers, which made similar assumptions regarding that bill as they did regarding Ryan’s bill.

    Now, I’m either misreading you, or you’re ignoring Kurgman’s point, that is, the CBO worked up estimates for only one part — the spending cuts — of Ryan’s plan.

    Would you care to respond to Krugman’s claim that the Post erred in its description of the CBO analysis?

  • August 6, 2010 at 7:33 am

    Mr. Krugman is one of those members of the elite class who boast of their background, education, awards (ie Nobel)in their efforts to prove to the rest of us how much better they are than we “little people”.
    Well, I submit that a Harvard education, Rhodes scholarship, or Nobel prize have proved nothing so much (given recent displays from high profile “experts”)as that they are meaningless.
    I would also like to suggest that Mr Krugman, and others of his ilk, are the very embodiment of that old definition of insanity: Doing (or believing) something over and over, but expecting a different outcome each time.

  • August 6, 2010 at 8:47 am

    It was not all that long ago that it was Democrats crying deficit… how times change.

    It is the intellectual dishonesty and lack of rigor from the media that promotes these shell games.

    Let us start with: Ponzi Scheme Social Security. SS has obligations increasing with a system that guarantees insolvency: Fantastic. The whole country saw Bernie Madoff for the crook he was yet many are blind to the larger villain playing the same game. I suppose most people turn the blind eye because they are looking for what they hope will be theirs while they mismanage their finances. News: less money later is not going to support your lifestyle or keep you in your home once you are priced out of it.

    So, while the deficit is no longer an issue for the Democrats (because it them spending the money on their friends) the song remains the same.

    Make November count and vote out every single elected official that has defrauded the American people with their voting records.

    Before we ever, ever, should have initiated a ‘new’ program it would have been prudent to repair and amend the old ones that are already in trouble… deep trouble. No, Kenyan Commie boy and his lefty pals thrust healthcare down our throats. How do we pay for it? ~Shrug~ someone else’s problem…

    While the government has grown many groups of people have also grown comfortable with business supporting this monstrosity. It makes sense these people do not want to rock the boat that fills their wallets. However, what of the rest of the country? Unemployed and underemployed workers are S.O.L. and the employed in many cases are not far behind.

    Had there been a pro-business atmosphere in this administration; a true pro-business atmosphere (and not the phony baloney one people like Arthur Levitt say there is because he is a Dem) than we might very well be seeing some vastly different numbers here. However, we are not. Sadly, this cast of characters are more concerned with pushing a liberal agenda than they are fixing the issues that another guy (also back in the mix with his heinous now former Senator wife) once said “Its the economy stupid” when the economy mattered to the media. Where is he crying about ‘the economy stupid’ now?!? Does the economy have a different meaning with the ability to pay one’s bills somehow change with the mix of party in government?!? Please!

    Liberal activist judges and constitutional end run are about all the hope and change we really have got. However, this is not what Dirty O ran on did he?

    Krugman is a hack. He is also an example of what is to be found where people spend a small fortune to send their children to learn like minded garbage from him and his lefty pals. Just hope the money spent on these educational endeavors lead to gainful employment for these same children down the road. But will it? Has Krugman considered how many jobs go elsewhere with the companies who like to pay cheaper wages than what it would cost to pay an American a reasonable living wage? No, not so special K doesn’t mention much of that. But, if he did I can only imagine that this would be the fault of business and not Government. Remember Government can do no wrong… unless they are in the other party. This is also no service. We need to know who the rats are on both sides.

  • August 6, 2010 at 11:45 am

    Anytime you use a tabloid style photo trick like that to start a piece it just shows that you don’t have anything worth saying. This is weak propaganda. derrr…

  • August 8, 2010 at 7:45 am

    If you don’t think that is funny…you don’t have a sense of humor.

  • August 11, 2010 at 5:39 pm

    “Whether this is true or not, no one knows… That is a sign of a weak intellect.”

    Are you serious? What the hell do you mean “no one knows”? Go look it up. Talk about signs of a weak intellect. How many times do you describe yourself as an “intellectual” on this horrid site while you shovel out dreck like this and your commenters, retards like you, assail the “pretentious elites.”

    Here, you lazy sack, I looked it up for you. So I expect a correction of your assertion that “no one knows” and Krugman is playing “a shell game.” Refusing to admit being wrong is a sign of a magnificently weak intellect. You have the reading comprehension skills of a grade schooler, and not a particularly bright one.

    By the way, on your comment-closed 2010 prediction page you call Teabagger moron Sharron Angle “Susan Angle.” Clearly you are a real stickler for details.

  • August 11, 2010 at 5:45 pm

    Sorry, but you are misinformed. From Ryan himself:

    Krugman attacked Ryan for not having the Congressional Budget Office officially score how much revenue his Roadmap would generate. An analysis by the Tax Policy Center, a left-leaning Brookings/Urban Institute project, showed that Ryan’s tax reforms would not generate enough revenue to eliminate the deficit. But Ryan points out that it is not the CBO’s role to score revenue–it’s the job of the Joint Committee on Taxation.

    In other words….Krugman is playing a shell game, and knows it.

Comments are closed.