Posted tagged ‘Paul Krugman’

How to Respond to Ridicule

August 7, 2009

The White House and the DNC are taking Rule #5 straight out of Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals with regard to the American citizens protesting against a government takeover of the nation’s entire health care system.

RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.

Even if they are motivated by their own fear and 41% of Americans view the protesters favorably, it is infuriating indeed. It is a childish tactic that requires an infantile response.

Keep your temper, keep your sanity and even smile as you answer their ridicule with the “Pee Wee Herman Defense”:

Here’s an example.

Paul Krugman, menace to society, opined in today’s New York Times that health care protesters are hypocrites and racists.

Hey, Krugman – I know you are but what am I?


Krugman Tries to Wiggle But Thornton Nails Him Down

June 17, 2009

In a typically snide response, Paul Krugman tries to deny he advocated a housing bubble in 2002. But Mark Thornton, a Senior Fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, has found further proof that Krugman did indeed call for the creation of a housing bubble – again and again.

jokerburningmoney_tbiKrugman Did Cause the Housing Bubble
by Mark Thornton

Here is Paul Krugman from his blog trying to deny that he was a persistent advocate for the housing bubble and below that are quotes from him just prior to the bubble taking off. ht Benjamin Lee
“And I was on the grassy knoll, too”

One of the funny aspects of being a somewhat, um, forceful writer is that I’m regularly accused of all sorts of villainy. I was personally responsible for the demise of Enron; my nonexistent son worked for Hillary; etc.. The latest seems to be that I called for the creation of a housing bubble.

Paul Krugman


German Interview, undated

“During phases of weak growth there are always those who say that lower interest rates will not help. They overlook the fact that low interest rates act through several channels. For instance, more housing is built, which expands the building sector. You must ask the opposite question: why in the world shouldn’t you lower interest rates?”

May 2, 2001

I’ve always favored the let-bygones-be-bygones view over the crime-and-punishment view. That is, I’ve always believed that a speculative bubble need not lead to a recession, as long as interest rates are cut quickly enough to stimulate alternative investments. But I had to face the fact that speculative bubbles usually are followed by recessions. My excuse has been that this was because the policy makers moved too slowly — that central banks were typically too slow to cut interest rates in the face of a burst bubble, giving the downturn time to build up a lot of momentum. That was why I, like many others, was frustrated at the smallish cut at the last Federal Open Market Committee meeting: I was pretty sure that Alan Greenspan had the tools to prevent a disastrous recession, but worried that he might be getting behind the curve.

However, let’s give credit where credit is due: Mr. Greenspan has cut rates since then. And while some of us may have been urging him to move even faster, the Fed’s four interest-rate cuts since the slowdown became apparent represent an unusually aggressive response by historical standards. It’s still not clear that Mr. Greenspan has caught up with the curve — let’s have at least one more rate cut, please — but the interest-rate cuts do, cross your fingers, seem to be having an effect.

If we succeed in avoiding recession, this will mark a big win for let- bygones-be-bygones, and a big loss for crime-and-punishment. And that will be very good news not just for this business cycle, but for business cycles to come.

July 18, 2001

“KRUGMAN: I think frankly it’s got to be — business investment is not going to be the driving force in this recovery. It has to come from things like housing, things that have not been (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

DOBBS: We see, Paul, housing at near record levels, we see automobile purchases near record levels. The consumer is still very much in this economy. Can he or she — or I should say he and she, can they bring back this economy?

KRUGMAN: Well, as far as the arithmetic goes, yes, it is possible. Will the Fed cut interest rates enough? Will long-term rates fall enough to get the consumer, get the housing sector there in time? We don’t know”

Continue reading

Fannie’s Smoking Gun

March 3, 2009

From The LRC Blog:

Fannie’s Smoking Gun

Posted by Bill Anderson at March 2, 2009 02:39 PM

It seems that the editors of the New York Times and Paul Krugman are practicing selective amnesia again. You might recall that they have been adamant in their insistent that Fannie and Freddie were not the cause of any difficulties in the markets, and it was all due to the lack of regulation of private markets.

Rob Blackstock has sent me a copy of an article from the September 30, 1999, New York Times in which Fannie began to ease credit:

In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets — including the New York metropolitan region — will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring.

Fannie Mae, the nation’s biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits. (emphasis mine)

 In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans from finance companies that charge much higher interest rates — anywhere from three to four percentage points higher than conventional loans.

Continue reading

And for your listening enjoyment, “Take a Load Off Fannie” by The Band