The First Excerpts Of Paul Krugman's Battle With Joe Scarborough Are Out...

[Procrustes Stretched]

I keep waiting for the transcript (free). Scarborough agreed there is no serious immediate spending problem.

Scarborough also put forth that silly old argument about American markets expanding because Japan, Germany, Europe, the world was in tatters...he neglects the fact that meant there was no markets overseas to sell what we produced. Joe repeats all the right wing spin shit and like most right wingers uses ad hominem attacks, while saying it is others do as he is doing so himself, all the while saying anyone who knows him knows he doesn't engage in what he is engaging in...

Any difference here is overshadowed by agreement: Both think we should invest in the economy in the short term, while simultaneously believing that long term debt is a problem (in their exchange, Scarborough misleadingly implied that Krugman doesn’t believe this).

Scarborough also actually agreed with Krugman that the most serious problem facing the country right now is long term unemployment. “Now, the urgent problem is the highest long term unemployment since the 1930s,” Krugman said. To which Scarborough replied, “right,” before adding that long term debt is also a problem — again, a position that Krugman (and Obama) agree with.

The only perceptible difference Scarborough identified with Krugman was over when specifically we need to begin acting on long term debt — and even here the differences weren’t all that clear. Scarborough seems to want to begin acting in five years (and wants to plan for that now); Krugman perhaps sees the problem in somewhat less urgent terms. All these “gotchas,” in which Scarborough threw old Krugman quotes about debt in his face, only showed what we already know — that Krugman recognizes that debt is a long term problem. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/03/05/joe-scarborough-versus-the-world/

Politicians and political pundits have their own style of debate and arguing. Once you figure it out it is easier to shine the light on what fools they are

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Perfect air head liberal can't identify even one good point on economics that Krugman made??

Dante knows better than to attempt to engage you in a rational debate on economic or any other policy points made. I have no interest in a back and forth with a moron like you

translation: I lack the IQ for substance, but have the IQ to find what Joe Scarborough ( a non-economist) says about economics very very meaningful??

See why we are positive a liberal will be slow??

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Ed, I have no time to waste on a tool like you. Did it a while ago. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice...

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Ed, I have no time to waste on a tool like you. Did it a while ago. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice...

translation: I lack the IQ for substance, but have the IQ to find what Joe Scarborough ( a non-economist) says about economics very very meaningful??

See why we are positive a liberal will be slow??

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

we have more than one PBS station out here in this market. have to watch it again, catch the whole thing start to finish

but it was funny watching Mourning Joe do his routine. Had to bring up Al Gore and complain that Gore and Krugman complain about ad hominem attacks, only to then attack Krugman personally

Their dispute is reflective of a bigger divide: On one side is the standard Washington wise man/centrist pundit view of the world, embodied by Scarborough and some of the people he cites, like former Joint Chiefs chair Mike Mullen and Richard Haass of the Council on Foreign Relations. On the other are a wide variety of economists—avowed liberals like Krugman, but also the not-particularly-ideological analysts at places like the Federal Reserve, major bank economics shops, and business forecasting firms, who generally see wisdom in reducing the deficit over time but also see big risks to the economy if the effort moves to fast, and not much reason to fear an imminent debt crisis.

...

But to economists, deficits are simply the difference between revenues and outlays. A large deficit could be a good thing if it’s going toward a productive investment. A small deficit can be a bad thing if the economy needs more support. So if you’re worried about deficits, you need to say why.

Joe Scarborough, Paul Krugman and the economist-pundit divide on debt and deficits

bot

back on topic and I apologize for going along with allowing the troll to take off topic

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

we have more than one PBS station out here in this market. have to watch it again, catch the whole thing start to finish

but it was funny watching Mourning Joe do his routine. Had to bring up Al Gore and complain that Gore and Krugman complain about ad hominem attacks, only to then attack Krugman personally

Their dispute is reflective of a bigger divide: On one side is the standard Washington wise man/centrist pundit view of the world, embodied by Scarborough and some of the people he cites, like former Joint Chiefs chair Mike Mullen and Richard Haass of the Council on Foreign Relations. On the other are a wide variety of economists—avowed liberals like Krugman, but also the not-particularly-ideological analysts at places like the Federal Reserve, major bank economics shops, and business forecasting firms, who generally see wisdom in reducing the deficit over time but also see big risks to the economy if the effort moves to fast, and not much reason to fear an imminent debt crisis.

...

But to economists, deficits are simply the difference between revenues and outlays. A large deficit could be a good thing if it’s going toward a productive investment. A small deficit can be a bad thing if the economy needs more support. So if you’re worried about deficits, you need to say why.

Joe Scarborough, Paul Krugman and the economist-pundit divide on debt and deficits

bot

back on topic and I apologize for going along with allowing the troll to take off topic

so why be so afraid to tell us Krugman's best point??????????????

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Krugman says Washington can't focus on more than one thing at a time. Scarborough says Washington can focus on jobs and the deficit at the same time. I guess this explains:

Charlie Rose: In terms of the short term, Paul doesn't think we have a spending problem. You think we have a spending problem, right now? This year? Next year?

Joe Scarborough: Next year? I don't think over the next, three, four, five years it's going to cause a serious problem. I think-I think if you look again at the projections, if you look at what we need to do for Medicare, Medicaid, I think we need to start planning for that right now. And that's, I think, where we disagree. I think Washington can do two things at once.

Paul Krugman: Let me ask a serious question. Would you support an extra $200 billion a year in spending on infrastructure and education right now?

JS: Oh yeah. I talk about it all the time.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Krugman says Washington can't focus on more than one thing at a time. Scarborough says Washington can focus on jobs and the deficit at the same time. I guess this explains:

Charlie Rose: In terms of the short term, Paul doesn't think we have a spending problem. You think we have a spending problem, right now? This year? Next year?

Joe Scarborough: Next year? I don't think over the next, three, four, five years it's going to cause a serious problem. I think-I think if you look again at the projections, if you look at what we need to do for Medicare, Medicaid, I think we need to start planning for that right now. And that's, I think, where we disagree. I think Washington can do two things at once.

Paul Krugman: Let me ask a serious question. Would you support an extra $200 billion a year in spending on infrastructure and education right now?

JS: Oh yeah. I talk about it all the time.

more importantly, can you say if Krugman is right about anything and why or must you admit as a typical liberal that you lack the IQ to do so and then talk around the subject rather than address it??

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

see you in the bull ring you cowardly fuck face ed.

 

[California Girl]

Krugman is an academic. Mourning Joe is a pundit and campaigner.

Weird how - when it is convenient - the left worship pundits and diss academics.... and vise versa.

Lots of people are academics - it does not make them infallible. Sorry to bring reality into your whinefest. I'll leave you to your ranting now.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

see you in the bull ring you cowardly fuck face ed.

more importantly, can you say if Krugman is right about anything and why or must you admit as a typical liberal that you lack the IQ to do so and then talk around the subject rather than address it??

No offense dude but why not ask questions and try to learn?? Do you want to be a liberal all your life??

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Krugman is an academic. Mourning Joe is a pundit and campaigner.

Weird how - when it is convenient - the left worship pundits and diss academics.... and vise versa.

Lots of people are academics - it does not make them infallible. Sorry to bring reality into your whinefest. I'll leave you to your ranting now.

Worship? The left doesn't worship.

Dante disses academics and pundits. Dante commented on an academic going into a debate with an accomplished politician/pundit/talk show host.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

see you in the bull ring you cowardly fuck face ed.

more importantly, can you say if Krugman is right about anything and why or must you admit as a typical liberal that you lack the IQ to do so and then talk around the subject rather than address it??

Not only can I do so, I can whoop your ass defending him in the Bull Ring against you

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

see you in the bull ring you cowardly fuck face ed.

more importantly, can you say if Krugman is right about anything and why or must you admit as a typical liberal that you lack the IQ to do so and then talk around the subject rather than address it??

Not only can I do so, I can whoop your ass defending him in the Bull Ring against you

ok then please pick a substantive point Krugman made and defend it or admit you lack the IQ to do so. Thanks

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

take a look first: http://www.usmessageboard.com/bull-...nte-and-dante-on-scarborough-and-krugman.html in the call out thread. then we move on form there if you care to

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

take a look first: http://www.usmessageboard.com/bull-...nte-and-dante-on-scarborough-and-krugman.html in the call out thread. then we move on form there if you care to

ok then please pick a substantive point Krugman made and defend it or admit as a lliberal you lack the IQ to do so. Thanks