Do you have enough dirt to fill in holes that big?

This reminds me of my childhood, when my Dad tried to explain government spending to me. He referred to it as “taking money out of the right pocket and sticking it in the left pocket”. At the time I didn’t really understand but now I can see the process in action.

Except he should have added that both pockets have holes in them…

Thanks for the article. I’d like to send a link to your article to some friends of mine, but you didn’t fill Krugman’s hole well enough. Without taking on the “multipliers” directly, Krugman and the other leftists sound more scientific and practical to a layman, whereas your arguments sound more theoretical. The fact that you admitted ignorance of the multipliers makes it seem as though Krugman is looking at his part of the elephant and you are looking at your part of the elephant, and from a layman’s perspective you could both have some good points. To demolish his argument you need to write with authority on the multipliers.

Therefore, Krugman created not just 1 hour of employment for you, but perhaps 15.

Where do you take your “dirt” to fill those holes ?

By taking “dirt” over there to fill holes here, won’t you create holes overthere ?

So the stimulus plan is just displacing the problem, it is not filling it up.

Please, PLEASE no more Krugman articles. Focus on Galbraith instead.

Another logical article from Robert Murphy.

Apparently establishment economists reside in a world of illusion—a world of illusion populated not by actual human beings, but by some type of fictitious entity called the collective.

If economists such as Krugman would think in terms of the individual, they might actually grasp the workings of the marketplace. In fact, they would give up their ridiculous notions about how people should act contrary to their best interests.

A person who actually believes that consumers should cure their debt problem by spending more money has obviously removed himself from reality. You know, give an alcoholic with more liquor, supply a drug addict with more dope, solve your debt problems with more debt. Ah, there is no hope for the illogical thinker.

Krugman is a famous economist, a Nobel Prize Winner in Economics. His success rests on the sad fact that Americans love it when doctors (quacks) of economics inject them with their daily dose of illusion. The medicine of reality that a Robert Murphy offers isn’t to their liking. And of course, Krugman is a virtuoso at playing the establishment’s favorite tune “Government Interventionism.”

Inquisitor is right. I believe that he sees the need to focus less on the intellectuals of the lesser sense and focus more on the “philosophers” who are the ideal for the intellectual rank and file. As Hayek recognizes, the philosopher has great ability to effect the general consensus in a direction in favor of the views on what amounts to greater coercive intervention, typically a call for enlarged and emboldened state action. Attacking Krugman or other intellectual directly may have little effect on the superstructure of the anti-capitalist mindset. Keeping in mind Thoreau, Freedom advocates are spending much time attacking the shoots and would greatly increase their effectiveness by undermining the foundational philosophers of socialism.

“Freedom advocates are spending much time attacking the shoots and would greatly increase their effectiveness by undermining the foundational philosophers of socialism.”

That has already been done and has had negligible results. The problem is with the analogy. People look to the Krugmans of the world for analysis and advice… so in this sense, Krugman is the “foundation”. Failing to respond to the Krugmans would be largely giving up the fight for freedom.

Great question, Niccolo. I plan to use it too.

Larry N. Martin wrote:

If only we could get Krugman to stay in the hole while it’s being filled in. Then something productive will have been accomplished!
No such luck – you’re forgetting that Paul Krugman is a weasel – he’d just burrow his way out!

Seems like many of you have never dug a hole and filled it in again. I’ve done this many times, you almost always need more dirt to fill the hole back up, even though you put something in that hole that takes up a lot of the space! (for example a fence post)

“#

I’m still wondering exactly how a recession occurs despite the most massive years of fiscal spending in US history.

I’ve asked Krugman and he still has yet to answer.”

Gj Niccolo, I’m going to use this one.

Yancey
Oh no! The last thing we need is more “New Ideas from Dead Economists”!

it’s not just the making and re-filling of holes that creates wealth, it’s the careful placement of dollar-bills in the glass jars that get buried that gives keynesianism its intellectual horsepower.

murphy, stop nattering and grab the shovel. america needs you digging.

I think John Z is on to something. What would Mises do with a “Joe the Plumber” income in this economy? What Practical advice could we get?

It seems to me, talking to my clients and friends, Left and Right, that all people need to turn up their noses at Krugman and his ilk is to benefit directly from a more common sense economic thought. Left or Right, a loaf of bread is still a loaf of bread, retirement is stilll not possible, and gas still goes into the tank of the car that cost an arm to purchase.

What should we be doing as individuals that is of practical benefit to us?

Krugman et al can “brainwash” all day long and it means nothing to the average Joe. If his type of “thinking” is to be reduced to the compost it is, then a practical guide for the layman is needed, and an on-going discussion of it, as it applies in real time, to real situations, within the limited free market we DO have. A successful track record of predictions and advise will do more to change people’s minds than philosophical discussion and counter argument ever will.

So, what DID Krugman do with the money? Did he say one thing and then do something else? I’ll bet he invested it, socked it away somewhere, probably bought monetary metals and other hard commodities.

What is a good way to save in this economy and culture?

What would Mises do with HIS money?

I’m an ammature philosopher. I can tell you most people can’t get close enough to philosophy to really grasp the importance of philosophical thought. Krugmanesque Econ might as well be the Mikado sung in swahili! But put their incomes on the table and threaten to “use it or loose it” and they get pretty philosophical real quick!

Freedom is only a practical issue when you are in jail. Talk to people about the problems they have today, and you can reach them when you talk about the bigger picture. Make practical predictions that people can learn to count on, and Krugman will become the quack he is, in the people’s eyes.

Let’s make Austrian Economics PERSONAL.

Spot the obvious troll, again!

Hilariously bad is a term I’d reserve for Krugman’s pathetic “critiques” of Austrian econ. So indeed, do chuckle away. You don’t seem to realize that Krugman is being dismantled here (and elsewhere.) Huben is just a hack who likes collecting links of articles already refuted and dissected, such as those of Krugman. He needs to get a life.

The current ‘leaders’ and the economists they recieve advisment from are going to drive this country into the ground and we may soon lose the number 1 spot in the world. China just bumped Germany out of the way for the number 3 spot.

It’s funny, even a student without much education in economics wrote in my uni newspaper how foolish the spend-and-spend policies by Brown in the UK are, him being an intellectual epigone of Keynesians such as Krugman… obviously economists can’t model commonsense, so out of the picture it must go! Can’t be “operationalized” after all!

Well he came back, and tried at least. :p