At 13:45 30/04/2013, you wrote:
(EW) I don't understand all of this negativity about Krugman. I read him
quite regularly and find that he has interesting and thought provoking
things to say. Essentially, he's a Keynesian and though Keynes is a
little dated now, he still offers some solutions. . . .
(KH) He's not just a "little dated". His (anti-Say, anti-Smith) central
policy is pretty well dead wrong, as he himself came to think in his later
years and as you describe in your second paragraph below.
(EW) . . . However, the economy would likely have to be reset considerably
to apply those solutions.
The resetting process would have to find a strong reason for
spending. Central bankers have seen to it that there is plenty of money
at hand and interest rates are as flat as they can be. Still nothing is
happening. Neither the private sector nor the public sector are inclined
to do very much. Perhaps we need a war? The huge amounts of spending
required to fight WWII and then rebuild brought about very good economic
times for two or three decades thereafter. Many, including, Krugman, have
argued that a way to end the current malaise is to rebuild crumbling
public infrastructure, but that isn't about to happen.
The problem is that our governments are now into austerity and
sequestration -- into cutting back or shutting down spending. Thinkers
like Krugman are urging an opening up, doing useful things and putting
people back to work. I see a lot of merit in that.
(KH) So do I. However, I'd like to see a single specific proposal for
growth businesses from Krugman and his ilk.
Keith
Ed
From: Keith Hudson <[email protected]>
To: "RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUATION"
<[email protected]>; [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 6:46:28 AM
Subject: Re: [Futurework] Capitalism is killing our morals, our future -
MarketWatch
At 06:01 30/04/2013, you wrote:
------->
>(MS) Afterthought: Maybe Krugman is more like Tiresias than Cassandra.
Though he doesn't have to transform into female form. It's said that Mrs.
Krugman is the instigator of his op-eds.
Keith
me> Arthur wrote:
me>
me>> I don't perceive professor Krugman as a whiner but more as a
me>> Cassandra.
me>
me> That's my perception, too.
REH> Actually REH wrote that.
Ummmmm.... Lemme see here...Ooop, right. Sorry.
So I missed Arthur's squib, too, which was to follow your
above-misattributed remark with:
Arthur> Yes someone who can't get enough of the spotlight.
So Krugman is a sort of prima donna? Hogging the spotlight, upstaging
the other figures in the drama? Well, I dunno. If he just put out
stuff equitably reasoned in the highly qualified propositions and
tentative hypotheses of an academic paper on economics, most people,
even readers of the NYT, would never wade through it.
At least he writes readable prose, readable enough to merit
criticism. Better than extemporaneous rants posted to U-tube.
Afterthought: Maybe Krugman is more like Tiresias than Cassandra.
- Mike
--
Michael Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada .~.
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
