The View From 1776

The Daily Socialist - 7/15/10

Paul Krugman’s views on tax cuts, revenues, and trends of the 1970s.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 07/15 at 11:18 PM
  1. It appears that the entire content of William L. Anderson's writings, that you repeatedly post, are criticisms of Krugman. You wonder it this guy has a life.

    This approach is somewhat monomaniacal, and eventually is very boring for your readers. Tom. Even when Anderson can't find anything interesting to carp about, he manages to blather on and on.

    In this post, the highlight of his inane column is quoting himself, when he says he asked a question of Krugman at some obscure conference six years ago.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  07/16  at  10:00 AM
  2. Mr. jay:

    You are top of the line in ad hominem derogation. Mr. Anderson is an economist who is far better informed than you about economics. If what he has to say bores you, don't read it.

    But, as you have characterized his analysis of Krugman's writing as inane, please be specific. Exactly what is inane; exactly what is mere blather?

    If you can't mount a rebuttal that deals specifically with what is said, elementary decency would counsel you to say nothing. Even saying that you disagree is more civil than a contemptuous put down that suggests the subject is so far beneath you that you need not deign to deal with specifics.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  07/16  at  02:50 PM
  3. Tom,

    I accept your criticism. It is very poor form to be vague and shoot with a blunderbuss in my critiques.

    That said, I am wondering if I am correct that the sole topic of Mr. Anderson's blog is Mr. Krugman and his alleged failings.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  07/18  at  05:36 PM
  4. Could part of the reason Krugman is such a frequent topic be how often the media does interviews of him on the financial news stations? I see him constantly on these programs, even CNBC World from Asian coverage of the news. Bloomberg TV just had him, Nial Ferguson, and another economist on that Krugman totally disagrees with even though they have been right on what was going to happen and is happening.

    I think however, that Krugman's fear that we will have a 2nd leg down if the stimulus isn't dramatically increased is right. But, that doesn't mean we should do it. He repeatedly says it won't cause problems and that it is a small portion of GDP.

    What he doesn't mention is the debt we have in households, corporations, cities and states that make any increase in federal deficits and debt much worse in the overall fiscal health of the nation. He doesn't mention that all debt is at risk, not just federal debt due to interest rates on debt that more stimulus could bring about unless the FED monetizes debt to keep the rates lower than normal.

    I am afraid that Krugman's cures are worse than the disease. He is trying to delay a depression that can't be avoided. Even the President's own Debt Commission says he is wrong.

    "We can't grow our way out of this," Bowles said. "We could have decades of double-digit growth and not grow our way out of this enormous debt problem. We can't tax our way out. . . . The reality is we've got to do exactly what you all do every day as governors. We've got to cut spending or increase revenues or do some combination of that."

    Notice, he says we can't tax out of this but, need to increase tax revenues. That is accomplished with good tax policy but, not tax rate hikes. It means going from a 17,000 page tax code that costs 400% more to comply with than is paid in taxes. A few page tax code with a simple no-cost or low cost to business would dramatically raise tax revenues and provide incentives to invest and grow business, like President Kennedy advised when he cut tax rates.

    Krugman appears to be a very well educated but, incompetent economist that lacks the ability to see beyond his own theories on what is good.
    Posted by JanPBurr  on  07/21  at  11:34 AM
  5. Jan,

    I think a lot of people would agree that a simplified tax code would be in everybody's best interest. But I think the 17,000 pages cannot be blamed on Krugman.

    The more likely suspects are the hundreds of paid lobbyists who toil in the halls of congress, and get paid for getting arcana added to the code to help their clients.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  07/21  at  02:19 PM
  6. I agree that Krugman is not responsible for the 17,000 page tax code but, is responsible for adding to it with his support of this administration instead of calling for them to do away with it in order to increase tax revenues. His support is causing more problems for America and its loss of business, jobs and investment dollars.

    He is well educated but lacks common sense.
    Posted by JanPBurr  on  07/21  at  02:33 PM
  7. Mr. Jay:

    Mr. Anderson's website is named Krugman In Wonderland. It deals almost exclusively with providing counter arguments to Krugman's assertions.
    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)  on  07/21  at  06:54 PM
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.