Krugman eviscerates Austrian school, hack, cranks

[Rshermr]

I do. They don't listen either.

Perhaps you can show us where manipulation of an economy by the gov is squelching a free society.

Gobs of examples. We can start with ACA, where the tax penalties are being used to force us to cater to the interests of the insurance industry. But read some news - basically anywhere the government dictates our economic decisions. And that kind of manipulation is embraced by power hungry leaders on "both sides of the aisle".

Uh, as soon as you can show me how the aca has made our cost of health insurance higher than it was prior to it, with a link, I will be impressed.

So, you can show NONE, me boy. You would think those countries being regulated by the gov heavily would be hollering bloody murder about their lack of a free society and the idea that the gov is squelching that free society. Sorry you are unable to show any.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

What does "market monetarism" have to do with the Austrian school?

Nothing.

The only thing we can be sure of here is that Dot Com, among others, has no idea what the Austrian school is.

 

[Rshermr]

So, Toro, attempting to prove something unknown to anyone but himself, says:

No. Rather than dealing with factual information, i.e. that over 500 economists and 5 Nobel laureates endorsed Romney, you instead attempt to discredit it by focusing on who reported it, even though it was widely reported at the time. That's to be expected from a partisan ideologue unable to respond intelligently.

I did not, my lying con, say the information was incorrect. What i did say (now pay attention, me boy) was that it was immaterial information provided by a completely partial source that does only one thing all the time: Attack democrats of any type and anything that they do. They are a completely partial source.
Now, had you read the drivel from the source you linked to, you would see that the attempt was to say that most economists supported romney. Which is not in fact supported at all. What I stated was the fact (Notice it is fact, and supported by rational sources) that 500 economists is something less than 3% of the economists in the US. Which would indicate that it was just more of the same for The Daily Caller. It does not, me boy, pass the giggle test. But nice try. Trying to support your sources article is a joke.


OK. Up to 3% of US economists support romney. Got it. And you think this proves WHAT?
Then, you are continuing to say that I said there are NO REASONABLE REPUBLICANS. I did not. You are, to put it simply, lying.
Did I call them lemmings?? Pretty much, but I can easily prove that:

Does that look like lemmings to you?? Sure does to those of us in the rational world. There was NO DOUBT on the first 39 votes that the repubs could not stop the ACA. NO chance at all. Yet the lemming like action of these clowns was to wast the time of congress to do it 40 TIMES
Then, we could talk about record obstruction of a do nothing republican congress. Unless, of course, you are a tool, and ignore all of the news.

Krugman, of course, doesn't respond, because he can't answer without rationalizing, backtracking or looking like a fool. The partisan hacks, though, have no such qualms, and howl in approval and resort to juvenile tactics such as shooting the messenger towards anyone who enters their lttle echo chamber and disagrees. It's funny when liberals try to discredit Fox News and the rest of the right-wing media, then do the exact the same thing as Fox News, et. al.

There is no liberal "fox news" because progressives would have nothing to do with a 24/7 attack outlet. Period. Only conservatives believe what they want to believe. Only cons support hundreds of bat shit crazy con web sites and fox. Because it makes them angry (which they want to be) and it is what they WANT to hear. As you have proven. The rational world knows that no political party is always wrong, as these outlets tell you the democratic party is. And the rational world recognizes what con tools do not want to recognize, like what is meaningful, and what the attempt is that is being made by a far right bat shit crazy web site. And they are smart enough not to get behind bat shit crazy web sites of any agenda. Unlike con tools like yourself. Who sees nothing at all wrong with using bat shit crazy conservative sites as their source. And who sees nothing wrong with telling you the meaning that claiming 500 economists support romney indicates.

Another trait of cons is that they tend to lie a lot. As an example, you indicate there is a left wing echo chamber. There is not, me boy. There is no well financed left wing echo chamber. just a few left wing web sites. Nothing orchestrated. And, me boy, i am not discrediting the message that there may be 500 economists that supported romney. What I am saying is that i have no reason to believe there are based on the source, and i resent the fact that you provide a source that would need everything they say vetted, based on that sources agenda and history. That should not be so hard for you to understand. AND, you of course ignore the rest of the document's point, which is the unsupported idea that most economists support romney and few support obama. Which is, according to most impartial sources, nonsense.

You are really just plain not passing the giggle test.

FTR, I didn't read this because I don't take your argument seriously.

Which translates, toro, to I have no rational argument. Thanks for your lame appology.

 

[Rshermr]

true. Using the Daily Caller as a source is like me using DailyKos & not expecting [MENTION=2926]Toro[/MENTION] to call me out on it. Come on Toro I thought you were better than that

Did 500+ economists and 5 Nobel Laureates endorse Romney or not?

Did 25000 NOT endorse romney?? Your source proves nothing. If we assume that 500 did endorse romney, how many economists endorsed obama??? Did your source forget to say?? Is the Daily Caller an impartial source??? No, it is not. So maybe 500 did, maybe they did not. Maybe 25000 endorsed obama, maybe they did not.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Uh, as soon as you can show me how the aca has made our cost of health insurance higher than it was prior to it, with a link, I will be impressed.

We assume all things get about 5 times more expensive when a govt monopoly runs things. When you have a govt monopoly you have no competition and people are not shopping with their own money. Did you ever hear about East/West Germany? You ought to loo it up?

 

[pinqy]

Uh, as soon as you can show me how the aca has made our cost of health insurance higher than it was prior to it, with a link, I will be impressed.

We assume all things get about 5 times more expensive when a govt monopoly runs things. When you have a govt monopoly you have no competition and people are not shopping with their own money. Did you ever hear about East/West Germany? You ought to loo it up?

Ah, except prices were pretty low in the Soviet Bloc countries because the government controlled the prices. This is why there were long lines for toilet paper as the higher cost was in time, not price.

There's an old Russian joke: A woman goes to the State store:
"How much are eggs?"
" 1 ruble for a dozen"
"I'll take a dozen."
"I'm sorry, we're out of eggs."

So she goes to the black market.
"How much are eggs?"
"10 rubles a dozen"
"10 rubles?! They're only 1 ruble at the state store!"
"Lady, if I didn't have any eggs, I could sell them for 1 ruble too."

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Ah, except prices were pretty low in the Soviet Bloc countries because the government controlled the prices. This is why there were long lines for toilet paper as the higher cost was in time, not price.

good joke but lets not forget that in the end thanks to the lib commie system they lived at about 20% of our standard of living, and, it would have been less if they could not have copied things from us. Liberals are trying to recreate that system here starting with health care.

Its pure ignorance. How else would you describe it?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Ah, except prices were pretty low in the Soviet Bloc countries because the government controlled the prices. This is why there were long lines for toilet paper as the higher cost was in time, not price.

good joke but lets not forget that in the end thanks to the lib commie system they lived at about 20% of our standard of living, and, it would have been less if they could not have copied things from us. Liberals are trying to recreate that system here starting with health care.

Its pure ignorance. How else would you describe it?

It's called being a Progressive

 

[Rshermr]

Ah, except prices were pretty low in the Soviet Bloc countries because the government controlled the prices. This is why there were long lines for toilet paper as the higher cost was in time, not price.

good joke but lets not forget that in the end thanks to the lib commie system they lived at about 20% of our standard of living, and, it would have been less if they could not have copied things from us. Liberals are trying to recreate that system here starting with health care.

Its pure ignorance. How else would you describe it?

It's called being a Progressive

Perhaps you can find some progressives who believed in the USSR and name them. I have known many, many progressives in my life, and never a single one who felt the ussr had a chance of making it. Like a libertarian socioeconomic system, is was destined to fail, and did. As have all libertarian based economies.
Who are those progressives again??

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Perhaps you can find some progressives who believed in the USSR and name them.

all the ones who took the 5th when Uncle Joe asked them if they were communists or ever had been communists. And all the one's who spied for Stalin. and all the ones in the great great book "Useful Idiots." Why not read it to see if you are one too!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I have known many, many progressives in my life, and never a single one who felt the ussr had a chance of making it.

10's of thousands marched in May Day parades all over America. Many stuck with Stalin even after his dealings with Hitler were exposed and after 60 million were slowly starved to death.
Obamacare is but a prelude to single payer in health care and then communism everywhere!

 

[Rshermr]

I have known many, many progressives in my life, and never a single one who felt the ussr had a chance of making it.

10's of thousands marched in May Day parades all over America. Many stuck with Stalin even after his dealings with Hitler were exposed and after 60 million were slowly starved to death.
Obamacare is but a prelude to single payer in health care and then communism everywhere!

As I knew, ed has no knowledge of any progressives who thought that the ussr economy would survive. Really, ed, just more of your delusions.
Single payer is not communism, dipshit. It is government run health insurance. Did you think that insurance and health care were the same, me boy?

So, we have given money to private insurance companies for years, and have had for decades the highest health insurance costs of any major country. Ed tends to lie a lot. Well, not tends to. He simply ALWAYS lies. As a paid con tool, that is what he does.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

As I knew, ed has no knowledge of any progressives who thought that the ussr economy would survive.

you mean except for the 10's of thousands of liberal progressives who marched in May Day parades all over America.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Single payer is not communism,

isn't it odd that Obama supports it after having had 3 libcommie parents and voting to left of Bernie Sanders and being mentored by Frank( communist party number 4577865) and isn't it odd the conservatives are 100% opposed to it?

 

[Dot Com]

I have known many, many progressives in my life, and never a single one who felt the ussr had a chance of making it.

10's of thousands marched in May Day parades all over America. Many stuck with Stalin even after his dealings with Hitler were exposed and after 60 million were slowly starved to death.
Obamacare is but a prelude to single payer in health care and then communism everywhere!

As I knew, ed has no knowledge of any progressives who thought that the ussr economy would survive. Really, ed, just more of your delusions.
Single payer is not communism, dipshit. It is government run health insurance. Did you think that insurance and health care were the same, me boy?

So, we have given money to private insurance companies for years, and have had for decades the highest health insurance costs of any major country. Ed tends to lie a lot. Well, not tends to. He simply ALWAYS lies. As a paid con tool, that is what he does.

Ed's IQ isn't high enough to be posting in my thread.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So, we have given money to private insurance companies for years, and have had for decades the highest health insurance costs of any major country.

yes we gave to them after we made competition illegal in health insurance. Competition makes us better. Do you understand?


You may have noticed that you cant buy health insurance across state lines. This is because the brilliant liberal mind made it illegal.

Imagine how expensive your car would be if each state demanded a particular kind of car or two. Most manufactures would sell a limited number of very expensive cars in a few states, but the national and international competition would be gone, price would skyrocket and quality would plunge.

Now you see how the liberals ruined the industry. If you took your idea about private savings accounts and then allowed national competition too, the price of medical care would be cut in half at least, and the quality would shoot up 1000 times. Why, we might all live forever, but we won't find out until we lift the liberal soviet yoke from our backs.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

10's of thousands marched in May Day parades all over America. Many stuck with Stalin even after his dealings with Hitler were exposed and after 60 million were slowly starved to death.
Obamacare is but a prelude to single payer in health care and then communism everywhere!

As I knew, ed has no knowledge of any progressives who thought that the ussr economy would survive. Really, ed, just more of your delusions.
Single payer is not communism, dipshit. It is government run health insurance. Did you think that insurance and health care were the same, me boy?

So, we have given money to private insurance companies for years, and have had for decades the highest health insurance costs of any major country. Ed tends to lie a lot. Well, not tends to. He simply ALWAYS lies. As a paid con tool, that is what he does.

Ed's IQ isn't high enough to be posting in my thread.

What's the IQ barrier on a thread whose premise is flawed from the very start?

 

[bripat9643]

good joke but lets not forget that in the end thanks to the lib commie system they lived at about 20% of our standard of living, and, it would have been less if they could not have copied things from us. Liberals are trying to recreate that system here starting with health care.

Its pure ignorance. How else would you describe it?

It's called being a Progressive

Perhaps you can find some progressives who believed in the USSR and name them. I have known many, many progressives in my life, and never a single one who felt the ussr had a chance of making it. Like a libertarian socioeconomic system, is was destined to fail, and did. As have all libertarian based economies.
Who are those progressives again??

That's called 20/20 hindsight. In the 20s and 30s progressives all thought the Soviet Union was showing the way to the future that worked.

 

[bripat9643]

Perhaps you can find some progressives who believed in the USSR and name them.

all the ones who took the 5th when Uncle Joe asked them if they were communists or ever had been communists. And all the one's who spied for Stalin. and all the ones in the great great book "Useful Idiots." Why not read it to see if you are one too!

Don't forget the liberal journalist who went to the Soviet Union in 1919 and said

"I have seen the future, and it works."

- Lincoln Stevens -​

 

[pinqy]

It's called being a Progressive

Perhaps you can find some progressives who believed in the USSR and name them. I have known many, many progressives in my life, and never a single one who felt the ussr had a chance of making it. Like a libertarian socioeconomic system, is was destined to fail, and did. As have all libertarian based economies.
Who are those progressives again??

That's called 20/20 hindsight. In the 20s and 30s progressives all thought the Soviet Union was showing the way to the future that worked.

Well, if you ignore the political repression and the destruction of agriculture (which hadn't quite caught up to them yet) then it was working. The Soviet Union increased literacy, improved infrastructure, and industrialized in a remarkably short period of time. Standard of living for the peasants did improve (for those that survived).

It wasn't sustainable, of course. Command economies are very good for short term solutions to particular problems, and really did help the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe industrialize. They don't work over any length of time because they're not flexible enough and they stagnate.

The U.S. is an excellent example on how to avoid those problems. During WWII we were under a command economy as the government dictated production, imposed rationing, and took a direct hand in allocation of most goods. But once the need was over, things went back to the free market and the economy took off.