Archive for the ‘Paul Krugman’ Category

Krugman vs. Estonia

Sunday, June 10th, 2012

Johns Hopkins University economist Steve Hanke on why New York Times columnist Paul Krugman is wrong about Estonia‘s tax and spending reforms.


Spain close to junk status, French lunacy, Estonian twitters

Thursday, June 7th, 2012

The rolling disaster that the European Union has become continues,

Spain downgraded again, at risk of junk status, or close to becoming a new bra size at Victoria’s Secret,

Spain’s sovereign debt rating was slashed three steps Thursday by credit rating agency Fitch, which warned that the nation is at risk of being downgraded into junk bond status.
The nation’s debt rating was cut from “A” all the way to “BBB,” the lowest rating that is considered investment grade. And the new rating was given a negative outlook, meaning it at risk for further downgrades.

France’s new president, François Hollande, must think this is a good thing (if he’s thinking)

France intends to lower the legal retirement age from 62 to 60 for a small class of workers, the government announced Wednesday, maintaining a campaign pledge by the newly elected president, the Socialist François Hollande, and partly undoing a major change by his predecessor, Nicolas Sarkozy.

The change will allow people who entered the work force at age 18 or 19 to retire with full state pensions at 60, instead of 62, assuming they have paid into the pension system for 41 or 41.5 years, the period typically required to qualify for full state benefits. Exemptions for short periods of unemployment will be added and those for maternity leave will be extended.

The pension change is expected to bring more than 110,000 additional retirements next year, at a cost to the state of more than $1.25 billion, the president’s office said in a statement, but is to be paid for entirely by a 0.1 percent rise in taxes on employees and companies. The decree is expected to take effect in November.

As if France could afford the retirees it has now??

Meanwhile, the only EU economy with annual growth of 7.6% (a whopping FIVE TIMES the euro-zone average) gets dissed by Paul Krugman.

Yes, the death-panels-and-sales-taxes guy whose blog is richly titled The Conscience of a Liberal, who will tell you that “the French have it right” when it comes to healthcare. The very same Krugman who puts to use the good-old “lies, damned lies and statistics”, or, as Bruce McQuain calls it, statistical cherry-picking.

As it turns out, Estonian president Toomas Hendrik Ilves (background here) saw Krugman’s tweet, and, voila! Flame war!

Go to the link in this tweet,

And maybe, just maybe, you’ll see why austerity may be what has made Estonia grow.

Estonia and Austerity: Another Exploding Cigar for Paul Krugman

Krugman’s Freudian note

Tuesday, March 29th, 2011

Economist Steve Hanke explains it, Prof. Krugman: Ace of the Ad Hominem Smear

Prof. Paul Krugman’s New York Times column of March 27th, “American Thought Police,” made this startling assertion: “the hard right — which these days is more or less synonymous with the Republican Party — has a modus operandi when it comes to scholars expressing views it dislikes: never mind the substance, go for the smear.”  What would Dr. Freud say?  Well, after careful study of Prof. Krugman’s works and one trip to the couch, Dr. Freud diagnosed the patient and proclaimed, “projection bias.”  Yes, the ace of the ad hominem smear is simply projecting his own attributes and habits of mind and deed to others.

Speaking of “go for the smear”, read about The Paranoid Style in Liberal Politics
The left’s obsession with the Koch brothers
. A lengthy article which illustrates at what lengths the Left will go.

25732

Krugman: “a combination of death panels and sales taxes”

Monday, November 15th, 2010

Paul Krugman must have been reading Trollope’s The Fixed Period, at least the part about avoiding the decrepitude and expenses of old age:

Paul Krugman Recommends ‘Death Panels’ to Help Balance Budget

RUTH MARCUS, WASHINGTON POST: Right now, 75 percent of people believe you could balance the budget without touching Medicare or Social Security; 75 percent of people believe that you can balance the budget without raising taxes. Well, you could, but it would be extraordinarily painful.

People need to get a little bit of reality therapy. There’s going to be another dose coming on Wednesday when another group is going to submit their recommendations, very concrete recommendations about how to do it. That’s the conversation we need to have before we start picking apart solutions.

PAUL KRUGMAN, NEW YORK TIMES: If they were going to do reality therapy, they should have said, OK, look, Medicare is going to have to decide what it’s going to pay for. And at least for starters, it’s going to have to decide which medical procedures are not effective at all and should not be paid for at all. In other words, it should have endorsed the panel that was part of the health care reform.

If it’s not even — if the commission isn’t even brave enough to take on the death panels people, then it’s doing no good at all. It’s not educating the public. It’s not telling people about the kinds of choices that need to be made.

A few minutes later:

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, HOST: But what is going to happen? I mean, are you clear on where a compromise is going to be? It’s got to be discussed before the end of the year, no?

KRUGMAN: No. Some years down the pike, we’re going to get the real solution, which is going to be a combination of death panels and sales taxes. It’s going to be that we’re actually going to take Medicare under control, and we’re going to have to get some additional revenue, probably from a VAT. But it’s not going to happen now.

Death and taxes: the progressive answer to every problem?

23833

Krugman asks Canadians, gets honest answer

Monday, August 3rd, 2009

Bwahahaha!

That excellent government-provided “free healthcare” in France

Friday, January 16th, 2009

Back in 2003 15,000 elderly and infirm people died during a heat wave in France, many of them while waiting in hospital emergency rooms. The government-provided “free healthcare” has been, and continues to be, a disaster. Currently, 10,000 people die every year of “medical accidents”, and there are an estimated 300,000 to 500,000 “serious undesirable events” i.e., errors per year.

Erik Svane of No Pasarán has been following the story here and here.

The original article (in French) first came out at JDD on January 10, and the numbers were quoted by Dr. Philippe Juvin,, professor of anesthesia and head of the emergency room at Beaujon Hospital. Dr. Juvin is also national secretary for health for the UMP party.

French Minister for Health Roselyne Bachelot confirmed Dr. Juvin’s numbers on January 14 (article in French).

Just so you know.

Digg!

Share on Facebook

Sanjay for Surgeon General

Wednesday, January 7th, 2009

Obama Wants Journalist Gupta for Surgeon General

President-elect Barack Obama has offered the job of surgeon general to Dr. Sanjay Gupta, the neurosurgeon and correspondent for CNN and CBS, according to two sources with knowledge of the situation.

Gupta has told administration officials that he wants the job, and the final vetting process is under way.

James Joyner was hoping for Dr. Phil, Roarin Rep wanted Dr Oz, I was hoping for House, M.D.

As it turns out, Gupta is very qualified for the job. In addition to his impressive CV, Krugman doesn’t like him, because Gupta doesn’t like Michael Moore:

But I do remember his mugging of Michael Moore over Sicko. You don’t have to like Moore or his film; but Gupta specifically claimed that Moore “fudged his facts”

Sounds good to me.

Althouse examines the Gupta-Moore argument,

Krugman’s link — at “mugging” — goes to a USA Today article about the conflict, which mainly dealt with the amount of money spent on medical care per person in the United States compared to Cuba. You can see Gupta and Moore having it out on the Larry King show on video here or read the transcript here. The fact that Gupta actually did get some numbers wrong overshadows the policy dispute: Moore wants the government to pay for all medical care for everyone, and Gupta thinks Moore might be right, but that things are more complex than Moore will admit.

It’s true, as Krugman says, that Moore comes across as an uncouth outsider and that we tend to feel an instinctive aversion to him. And Gupta is couth, an expert at projecting competence, expertise, and level-headedness. And Krugman is right that the uncouth speaker may be right when the couth speaker is wrong. On this occasion, Gupta got some things wrong, and where he was wrong, he quickly and clearly corrected himself and apologized. That’s part of the couth style. So where is this “lack of accountability” that Krugman talks about? Gupta didn’t get away with mistakes by speaking “in a socially acceptable way.” Gupta was immediately called to account, and he stepped up to it.

And what of Moore? Is he accountable? Moore may have not been wrong on this occasion, but he’s been wrong in the past about plenty of things, and his entire filmmaking style is based on a strong point of view — that is, bias — that involves distortion and emotive exaggeration. Does Moore make corrections and apologize? He method involves going doggedly forward toward his predetermined goals — like government-managed health care or opposition to the war or gun control.

On a related subject: As readers of this blog know, the so-called excellent Cuban healthcare is in such shambles that Cubans who have no dollars or access to foreigners-only clinics have to procure and bring their own suture thread to the hospital before they can have surgery.

Digg!

Share on Facebook

Krugman wins Nobel Prize

Monday, October 13th, 2008

Paul Krugman Wins the Nobel Economics Prize (also at the NYT)

Princeton economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman won the Nobel economics prize on Monday for his analysis of how economies of scale can affect trade patterns and the location of economic activity.

Good thing he didn’t win it on the merits of his assessment of the French helthcare system.

OUCH!

The Nobel Prize is never posthumous — it is only awarded to living persons. So some great minds such as John Maynard Keynes and Fischer Black never received the prize in Economics. All that has changed. With today’s award to Paul Krugman, the Nobel as gone to an economist who died a decade ago. The person alive to receive the award is merely a public intellectual, a person operating in the same domain as Oprah Winfrey. And even as a public intellectual, the prize is inappropriate, because never before has a scientist operating in the capacity of a public intellectual so abused and debased the science he purports to represent. Krugman’s New York Times column drawing on economics is the equivalent of 2006’s Nobelists in Physics, astromers Mather and Smoot, doing a column on astrology — and then, in that column, telling lies about astronomy.
But what’s done is done. The only question now is whether Krugman will pay taxes on the prize at the low rates enabled by the Bush tax cuts he has done so much to discredit, or if he will volunteer to pay taxes at higher rates he considers more fair.

$5 says, the Bush rates.

UPDATE
The Insufferability Poll! (h/t TigerHawk)

The Krugman Tax for Undeserved Prizes, since Nobel proceeds are tax-exempt.

Digg!

Share on Facebook

Gone are the days when you actually had to work for a Nobel Peace Prize

Monday, October 15th, 2007

Linus Pauling, who is the only person to win two undivided Nobel Prizes, won one in Chemistry in 1954 for his work applying quantum mechanics to chemistry, and eight years later one in Peace for his work against above-ground nuclear testing. In his spare time Pauling also worked towards developing the electrical car. While most people of our parents’ generation remember Pauling as the guy who wanted you to take vitamin C, Pauling is regarded as one of the outstanding scientists of all time.

Back in the olden days people like Albert Schweitzer, who was a medical doctor, a concert organist and a great humanitarian, won Nobel Peace Prizes. Schweitzer was also a theologian and a philosopher who believed that Western civilization was in decline for having abandoned the affirmation of life as its ethical foundation. He lived by his beliefs and spent most of his life working as a doctor in what is now Gabon, Africa.

Now you get a Nobel Prize for making a movie about yourself.

Al Gore, who the Nobel Prize announcer called Albert Arnold Algore Jr., made a movie that British courts found partisan, ruling last week that it contains no fewer than eleven material inaccuracies that need to be drawn to students’ attention if it is going to be shown in schools. That’s the movie the Nobel Prize Committee praises as an effort “to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change”.

Gore, unlike Schweitzer, is not depriving himself of the pleasures of a home that consumes electricity at a rate of about 12 times that of a typical house in Nashville. Gore also favors private jets instead of public airlines when he travels.

The Committee says that climate change (what ever happened to global warming?) might lead to wars and violent conflicts, hence the Prize. Those involved in the fight of their lives, the fight for liberty and democracy while oppressed by dictatorships, like the Buddhist monks in Burma, or the Ladies in White in Cuba, better come up with their own movies or they’ll get no prize at all.

I have referred to the Peace Prize as the Norwegian Badge of Uselessness, as we look at the awardees:

1988: The UN Peacekeeping forces, who have distinguished themselves after receiving their prize by their rapes and sex abuse, along with bribery and corruption, in places like Kosovo, Angola, Guinea and Congo.

1992: Rigoberta Menchu Tum, who lied about her life in Guatemala.

1994: Yasser Arafat, the inventor of skyjackings and father of modern terrorism.

2001: The UN and Kofi Annan, perpetrators of the largest scam in the history of mankind, the $30 billion dollar Oil-For-Food scandal.

2002: Jimmy Carter, who goes around the world certifying the elections as “open and democratic”, after spending less than twenty-four hours in country.

2004: Wangari Maatai, who preaches that AIDS is a virus created by Da Man.

2005: The International Atomic Energy Agency and Mohamed el-Baradei, who have yet to stop North Korea or anyone else from developing nuclear weapons.

I’m not even counting Betty Williams (1976) who earlier this year said she could kill George Bush, or Mikhail Gorbachev (1990) who embraced peace after losing the Cold War, and let’s not forget Henry Kissinger and Le Duc Tho (1973) for that “peace with honor” bit.

Small wonder that the Venezuelan government news agency wants us to believe that Hugo Chavez was a finalist for the prize in 2005. Hugo’s certainly buying enough weapons and making deals with Russia and Iran to earn himself a Prize down the line.

This year Al Gore won an Oscar, an Emmy and a Nobel Peace Prize. At this rate he may run for president again, or instead he may star on a one-man show on Broadway featuring the world’s most famous Powerpoint presentation. If he wins a Tony award for that, he’ll then outdo Rita Moreno, who hasn’t won a Nobel Peace Prize yet.

And here are the ones who didn’t win:

The prize was also not awarded to Morgan Tsvangirai, Arthur Mutambara and other Zimbabwe opposition leaders who were arrested and in some cases beaten by police earlier this year while protesting peacefully against dictator Robert Mugabe.

Or to Father Nguyen Van Ly, a Catholic priest in Vietnam arrested this year and sentenced to eight years in prison for helping the pro-democracy group Block 8406.

Or to Wajeha al-Huwaider and Fawzia al-Uyyouni, co-founders of the League of Demanders of Women’s Right to Drive Cars in Saudi Arabia, who are waging a modest struggle with grand ambitions to secure basic rights for women in that Muslim country.

Or to Colombian President Àlvaro Uribe, who has fought tirelessly to end the violence wrought by left-wing terrorists and drug lords in his country.

Or to Garry Kasparov and the several hundred Russians who were arrested in April, and are continually harassed, for resisting President Vladimir Putin’s slide toward authoritarian rule.

Or to the people of Iraq, who bravely work to rebuild and reunite their country amid constant threats to themselves and their families from terrorists who deliberately target civilians.

Or to Presidents Viktor Yushchenko and Mikheil Saakashvili who, despite the efforts of the Kremlin to undermine their young states, stayed true to the spirit of the peaceful “color” revolutions they led in Ukraine and Georgia and showed that democracy can put down deep roots in Russia’s backyard.

Or to Britain’s Tony Blair, Ireland’s Bertie Ahern and the voters of Northern Ireland, who in March were able to set aside decades of hatred to establish joint Catholic-Protestant rule in Northern Ireland.

Or to thousands of Chinese bloggers who run the risk of arrest by trying to bring uncensored information to their countrymen.

Or to scholar and activist Saad Eddin Ibrahim, jailed presidential candidate Ayman Nour and other democracy campaigners in Egypt.

Or, posthumously, to lawmakers Walid Eido, Pierre Gemayel, Antoine Ghanem, Rafik Hariri, George Hawi and Gibran Tueni; journalist Samir Kassir; and other Lebanese citizens who’ve been assassinated since 2005 for their efforts to free their country from Syrian control.

Or to the Reverend Phillip Buck; Pastor Chun Ki Won and his organization, Durihana; Tim Peters and his Helping Hands Korea; and Liberty in North Korea, who help North Korean refugees escape to safety in free nations.

But leave it to Paul Krugman who is (finally!, after being freed from the Times Select premium) getting some mileage out of being ridiculous,

What is it about Mr. Gore that drives right-wingers insane?

What, indeed, Paul, why don’t you tell us?

Which brings us to the biggest reason the right hates Mr. Gore: in his case the smear campaign has failed. He’s taken everything they could throw at him, and emerged more respected, and more credible, than ever. And it drives them crazy.

That must be it! Of course!

And how can Paul be wrong, when he knows that the French got it right when it comes to healthcare?

Erik at No Pasaran‘s been giving Al the respect he is due:


Maybe if Paul keeps it up, he’ll get his own poster, too, green camo shirt and all.

For a Nobel Peace Prize, Paul’s going to make himself a Powerpoint presentation and a movie.

Update
Jules Crittenden and Siggy take on the goracle. Tim Blair looks at the unclean Europe, but Mark Steyn remembers the cows.

(The first part of this post was cross-posted at Heading Right)
Digg!
Technorati: Al Gore, Paul Krugman
Share on Facebook

Conservatives aren’t joking, Paul

Friday, October 5th, 2007

This morning Paul Kurgman was saying that Conservatives Are Such Jokers:

Today’s leading conservatives are Reagan’s heirs. If you’re poor, if you don’t have health insurance, if you’re sick — well, they don’t think it’s a serious issue. In fact, they think it’s funny.

I don’t know what conservatives Krugman may be talking to, or if he’s even talked to any. Maybe he should come to Washington for the afternoon.

Yesterday seven Congressmen addressed a rally in Congress: All of them are urging earmark reform through the Discharge Petition. The petition would make each earmark’s sponsor publicly defend each earmark. Here’s a video:


The rally was by the attendees of the Defending the American Dream conference in Washington DC, and the focus is on

policies that are threatening to destroy the American Dream – higher taxes, more spending, burdensome regulation, and endless red-tape.

There were 200 hundred people attending the rally in the hot afternoon sun.

John McCain on pork:

Giuliani: “It’s your money, it should be your choice.”

Defending the Dream is posting more videos.

Kurgman believes that

What’s happening, presumably, is that modern movement conservatism attracts a certain personality type. If you identify with the downtrodden, even a little, you don’t belong. If you think ridicule is an appropriate response to other peoples’ woes, you fit right in.

Krugman ridicules the very people who are meeting in DC trying to bring about real prosperity and continuing growth to our country, people of every race, economic status, educational background. People on wheel chairs. Blind people. Single parents of young children struggling to make ends meet, and empty-nesters with vacation homes. People whose properties have been taken away by the government trough the abuse of eminent domain.

Krugman doesn’t know what the real world looks like.

It would be a good thing if he would come and listen to the people here, because these conservatives aren’t joking.
Digg!

Share on Facebook