I wonder which persona the Fed is going to put on today?
Krugman at the start of 2016 vs Krugman at the end of 2016. Wait. The first one is just two months back. pic.twitter.com/eSGumwywWY— Ramanan (@Ramanan_V) December 14, 2016
Krugman at the start of 2016 vs Krugman at the end of 2016. Wait. The first one is just two months back. pic.twitter.com/eSGumwywWY— Ramanan (@Ramanan_V) December 14, 2016
Yes, Krugman has really lost his marbles, becoming increasingly irrelevant by the day. He really wanted to have that position in the HRC administration. Kiss ass.
ReplyDeleteHow much you wanna bet he'll be crying foul if Trump actually gets any deficit spending on infrastructure in at all? Mike said in his most recent video there would be a recession around the corner. I can't wait for more of his histrionics when this happens.
Which face is it then?
ReplyDeleteSeems like Hyde in my relatively uninformed opinion.
Seems like... she is saying fiscal isnt required any more ...
ReplyDelete"Bernanke called for fiscal stimulus when UR was much higher, but....now it's "not obviously needed to provide stimulus to help us get back to full employment."
Seems to be agreeing with Krugman's latest position...
"pump priming!" type of belief I guess....
He's a hypocrite and intellectually dishonest. I started reading Krugman after the GFC; I wanted to know who was responsible for blowing up the economy. I don't have an economics background but I wanted to understand the macro behind the explanations. His arguments seemed at least superficially reasonable, but when he'd dig down a bit (get "wonkish") they devolved into an impenetrable wall of gobbledygook. I'm a physicist, so I'm used to following arguments with occasionally subtle or deep reasoning. This wasn't it. I eventually found my way to MMT, which at first I thought was nuts, but the iron-tight logic won me around; it was a theory with explanatory power.
ReplyDelete"I'm a physicist,"
ReplyDeleteNot surprising.... the economists just dont get enough STEM imo...