Skip to main content

View Diary: Paul Goes Platinum! (63 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Krugman has come a long way in a short (5+ / 0-)

    time. It was not very long ago that he was accusing MMT advocates of saying things that they never said, and he was refusing to provide any evidence to support his accusations. That controversy has finally gone away, because he has stopped making the accusations.

    And now, he even admits that the PCS approach might well work when we are at the zero bound. This point, the zero bound, has been one of his special arguments when he correctly assaults the Very Serious People (VSP), as he calls them. He points out repeatedly that the VSP model does not work at zero bound, and he enjoys it (so do I) when he lambastes the "scolds" who predict sky-high interest rates and runaway inflation.

    So, Krugman has finally been cornered. He is not yet willing to concede that the PCS approach would work even above the zero bound and at levels that have been more common in our history. His capitulation is not far away, and a major battle will be won for MMT. But not total victory.

    But stay tuned. I am sure that some one will put forward a 100-year plan encompassing four generations of Americans that will be financed by multiple platinum coins, and America will be beautiful.

    Might and Right are always fighting, in our youth it seems exciting. Right is always nearly winning, Might can hardly keep from grinning. -- Clarence Day

    by hestal on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 07:54:16 PM PST

    •  ... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      masslib

      This makes almost no sense whatsoever.

      Whatever you are saying is certainly abusing his positions very badly.

      The PCS approach has nothing to do with the zero bound at all. It has to do with the gov't's need to spend money (to avoid crashing the economy) and the legislative fiats that prevent the executive branch from doing so, in spite of congress having appropriated moneys through the usual budgetary process.

      The ZLB is all Keynesianism.

      •  Your argument is not with me, it is (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        chuckvw

        with Krugman.

        Might and Right are always fighting, in our youth it seems exciting. Right is always nearly winning, Might can hardly keep from grinning. -- Clarence Day

        by hestal on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 08:19:18 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Nope. (0+ / 0-)

          You're making a hash of it.

          •  Nope. You are way off base. Go read (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            chuckvw

            his blog at NYT, and then leave me alone.

            Might and Right are always fighting, in our youth it seems exciting. Right is always nearly winning, Might can hardly keep from grinning. -- Clarence Day

            by hestal on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 09:10:39 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I've read it regularly since a year (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Urban Owl

              before he got his Nobel.

              Further, when he makes claims particularly of a personal nature, he nearly always includes links to the original sources, so that one can readily gauge the truth of what he says.

              Given that what you wrote above makes a complete hash of the point of the PCS, and doesn't seem to understand what the ZLB means in economics (at least to salt-water/Keynesian economists), I think I'll stick with my own opinions, thankyouverymuch.

              •  I told you to leave me alone. Stop stalking me. nt (0+ / 0-)

                Might and Right are always fighting, in our youth it seems exciting. Right is always nearly winning, Might can hardly keep from grinning. -- Clarence Day

                by hestal on Thu Jan 03, 2013 at 09:29:08 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Stalking? WTF? (0+ / 0-)

                  Only in your apparently paranoid, drug-addled, febrile imagination is calling someone out for refusing to defend indefensible and inaccurate statements "stalking".

                  Defend your statements or piss off.

                  If you can't defend statements you make in a public forum against even casual argument, you have no business making them.

                  And if you can't do any better than calling me a stalker, you're proving my point -- you have no clue, no evidence, and no sense.

                  If  you want to state and argue anything semi-intelligent about either the ZLB or PCS, I'm happy to do so. Given that you have no apparent clue about either one, much less Paul Krugman's positions on either, I won't hold my breath.

                  Stalking, forsooth.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (169)
  • Community (68)
  • Civil Rights (44)
  • Baltimore (42)
  • Elections (35)
  • Culture (35)
  • Bernie Sanders (34)
  • Economy (31)
  • Texas (29)
  • Law (27)
  • Environment (26)
  • Labor (25)
  • 2016 (24)
  • Hillary Clinton (21)
  • Education (21)
  • Rescued (21)
  • Freddie Gray (20)
  • Health Care (20)
  • Barack Obama (19)
  • Racism (19)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site