Tag Archives: Paul Krugman

‘No Pizza For You!’: Drudge Report Falls For Daily Currant’s Satirical Story About Mayor Bloomberg

Ha! Conservatives always get caught “out there” by satirical wit…

Mediaite

The Daily Currant has fooled several members of the media into falling for satirical stories — from Glenn Beck and terrorist-contaminated pizza to Sarah Palin and Al Jazeera. On Friday, it fooled yet another: The Drudge Report. This time with a story about New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

The Currant’s story said Bloomberg “was denied a second slice of pizza today at an Italian eatery in Brooklyn” after reaching his “personal slice limit.” It was meant to be a jab at the mayor’s effort to limit the portions of sugary drinks sold in the city.

The Drudge Report played it up thusly:

As the Atlantic Wire reported, the splash only stuck around for a few minutes, around 8 a.m. Eastern time, before someone realized the mistake and took it down. The tweet still exists.

Recently, you may recall, The Daily Currant fooled The Washington Post into thinking Sarah Palinwas headed to Al Jazeera. It also successfully fooled the media with a story about Ann Coulterrefusing to board a plane with a black pilot” and Paul Krugman filing for bankruptcy after living a bitlavishly. And then there was that time Bill O’Reilly assaulted a department store Santa.

2 Comments

Filed under Conservative Bloopers, Satire

GOP: We’ve been lying all along

Oh my…is the Speaker of the House a bit upset with the tea-party faction of his caucus?

Salon

Boehner’s admission that we don’t really have a debt crisis reveals his party’s ulterior, program-cutting motives…

I never thought I’d write these words, but here goes: Thank you, John Boehner. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for finally admitting on national television that all the fiscal cliffs, sequestrations and budget battles you’ve created are, indeed, artificially fabricated by ideologues and self-interested politicians and not the result of some imminent crisis that’s out of our control.

America owes this debt of gratitude to Boehner after he finally came clean on yesterday’s edition of ABC’s “This Week” and admitted that “we do not have an immediate debt crisis.” (His admission was followed up by Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, who quickly echoed much the same sentiment on CBS’ “Face the Nation”).

In offering up such a stunningly honest admission, the GOP leader has put himself on record as agreeing with President Obama, who has previously acknowledged that demonstrable reality. But the big news here isn’t just about the politics of a Republican House speaker tacitly admitting they agree with a Democratic president. It is also about a bigger admission revealing the fact that the GOP’s fiscal alarmism is not merely some natural reaction to reality, but a calculated means to other ideological ends.

Before considering those ends, first remember that Boehner (like Obama) is correct on the facts.

As Nobel-winning economist Paul Krugman has pointed out, “Even if we do run deficits, federal debt as a share of GDP will be substantially less than it was at the end of World War II” and “it will also be substantially less than, say, debt in several European countries in the mid- to late 1990s.” It is also lower than the 80 percent of GDP level that many economists say starts to put countries in a precarious position. Additionally, citing Congressional Budget Office data, the Center for American Progress notes that the long-term debt outlook is only dire because the projections simply assume without question that “future Congresses will enact huge new deficit-increasing tax cuts and spending hikes.”

“The debt outlook is bad (but) we’re not looking at something inconceivable, impossible to deal with,” writes Krugman. “We’re looking at debt levels that a number of advanced countries, the US included, have had in the past, and dealt with.”

So yes, we should start dealing with the long-term debt in a pragmatic and sober way, but we shouldn’t pretend it is some sort of imminent crisis worthy of draconian austerity measures.

If we could somehow do that, then there would be plenty of gradual steps that could be taken right now — steps that deal with the debt in measured ways that do the least harm to the overall economy. Those include starting to phase out the Bush tax cuts, which show no correlation with job growth and yet are the single largest driver of annual deficits; starting to reduce defense and war spending, which, job-creation-wise, is one of the least effective ways for the government to spend money; starting to move the United States toward the least costly, more efficient, and more effective single-payer healthcare system that most industrialized countries have, and that lowers overhead for employers; and starting to spend more money on social programs that fight economic inequality, with the understanding that driving down such inequality tends to boost macroeconomic growth and consequently boost public revenues (this is the Reagan-esque idea of growing one’s way out of debt).

But, of course, we aren’t having a sober and measured discussion about such pragmatic solutions. Instead, the national conversation about the budget is dominated by debt demagogues with ulterior motives. Taking a page out of the shock doctrine playbook that says every crisis is an opportunity, these alarmists have sought to create the perception of an immediate crisis in order to quickly manufacture opportunities to legislate their otherwise politically impossible agenda items.

Continue here…

1 Comment

Filed under GOP Political Tricks, John Boehner

KRUGMAN: We Are On The Brink Of A Technology Revolution That Will Transform Our Economy

Paul Krugman, Laureate of the Sveriges Riksban...

As a quasi techie, this article caught my eye…

Business Insider

A life-changing technology revolution, which we thought it was decades away, is upon us, says economist Paul Krugman, author of “End This Depression Now!

“So far the information technology revolution doesn’t hold a candle to previous technology revolutions,” Krugman said in an interview with Business Insider editor-in-chief Henry Blodget.

“The really big revolutions were the ones that took place largely towards the end of the 19th century that actually powered growth for a long time after that.”

But now, with driverless cars becoming a reality, technology is closer to affecting our physical world – transportation, productivity and efficiency, among others.

Watch Krugman making the case against technology pessimists below.

http://www.businessinsider.com/paul-krugman-on-technology-and-the-economy-2013-2

Comments Off

Filed under Paul Krugman

Paul Krugman Explains Why He Really Didn’t Want That Treasury Job, Anyway

A new commenter inadvertently led me to this article.  Thank you and welcome, Ed Darrell  for your   original suggestion to read You need to watch this: Paul Krugman, ‘Jobs NOW, the key to our recovery’ .

Washington Monthly

In a fascinating and sprawling interview with Bill Moyers, airing this weekend on the PBS show, Moyers & CompanyNew York Times columnist and Nobel laureate Paul Krugman explained why he didn’t want to be nominated to the post of Treasury secretary, even after 235,000 people signed an online petition urging the president to appoint him, and offers his take on Jack Lew, the president’s nominee:

PAUL KRUGMAN: …I probably have more influence…, doing what I do now, than I would if I were inside trying to, you know, do the court power games that come with any White House — even the best — which I don’t think I’d be any good at. So no, this is fine. And what the president needs right now is he needs a hardnosed negotiator. And rumor has it that’s what he’s got, so.

BILL MOYERS: In Jack Lew?

PAUL KRUGMAN: That’s right. The president can’t pass major new legislation. He can’t formulate major new programs right now. What he has to do now is bargain down or ride over these crazy people in the Republican Party. And we what we need now is not deep thinking from the treasury secretary. If the president wants deep thinkers, he can call Joe Stiglitz, he can call other people. What he needs from the Treasury secretary is somebody who’s going to be very effective at dealing with these wild men and making sure that nothing terrible happens.

But that’s not the most interesting part of the interview. Believe it or not, where it gets really fascinating is in Moyers’ discussion with Krugman on the difference between a recession and a depression. (As the title of Krugman’s new book, End This Depression Now!, he thinks what we’re in is the latter.)

While he concedes that the current depression, as he sees it, is not as horrific as the Great Depression of the 1930s, Krugman asserts that it’s likely worse than we perceive, because things that once made a depression obvious to all — breadlines, “will work for food” signs and the like — have take new forms in the the electronic age, and at a time when some public welfare, however meager, is available, and all acting in concert to hide widespread suffering from view:

KRUGMAN: Somebody said that food stamps are the soup kitchens of the modern depression. That there’re a lot of people who would be standing in line to get that soup, who are instead, and it’s a good thing, who are instead getting — I guess it’s now called SNAP, Supplementary Nutritional Assistance Program — but who are getting those debit cards, and are getting essential food stuffs. And they’re at the grocery store and they look like anybody else. But the fact of the matter is they are still as desperate, they’re getting by day to day with the aid of a trickle of government aid, just like the people who were standing in line at the soup kitchens in the ’30s, but they’re not visible. They, we don’t have guys selling apples in street corners partly because, you know, the city licensing wouldn’t allow that anymore.

I totally buy that. I know lots of people of all generations who consider themselves middle-class, but are living hand to mouth. The young people working marginal jobs with no prospects and an unimaginable pile of college debt. The middle-aged people short-selling homes that were theirs for years. The old people who never earned enough to invest in mutual funds.

I know them. Don’t you?

The complete Moyers interview:

Comments Off

Filed under Paul Krugman

Paul Krugman Tells It Like It Is, Calls Debt Ceiling Negotiations ‘Hostage Taking’

krugman

I had hoped that  President Obama would considered economist, Paul Krugman for Secretary of the Treasury.  I’m certain that  Krugman’s signature is more legible than Jack Lew‘s (the POTUS’ pick for that position.)

Having said that, I must say after watching Peggy Noonan the video below and regular Sunday appearances on most of the cable and network  news shows, I’ve come to the conlusion that Peggy Noon is a right-wing ideologue that believes everything Fox News puts out there.

Addicting Info

This morning on “This Week” Paul Krugman refused to bow to the usual pundit-talk, telling fellow round table members that the GOP’s tactic on the debt ceiling is “hostage taking” and should not be allowed. Krugman defended the President’s position on the battle against complaints by columnist Peggy Noonan, who said that she thought Obama should be “sitting down and talking” to Republican Congressional leaders.

Ignoring the obvious retort – he HAS sat down with them and they won’t cooperate – Krugman told Noonan:

“This is hostage taking, this is walking into a room and saying, ‘I’ve got a bomb, give me what I want or I’ll blow up this room.’ This has never happened before and should not be allowed to happen.”

He went on to say that this is a much scarier proposition because, unlike with the so-called fiscal cliff, sequester and other GOP slash-and-burn strategies, what is at stake here is the “full faith and credit” of the U.S. and if that is damaged, we just can’t know what the result will be. Fellow panelist Al Hunt agreed with Krugman’s stance, saying that the GOP’s brinksmanship is “…not on the level, a complete fraud.”

Noonan continued to whine about Obama, though, saying that it was “unusual” that he can “never make a deal with those folks.” What Ms. Noonan is neglecting to take into account is that it is thosefolks who refuse to deal in good faith with this president, as if he hasn’t bent over backwards to try to deal with the ridiculous and selfish actions of GOP leaders. Noonan opined about the “herky-jerky, crisis cliff” way that things are happening in governance but either can’t or won’t face the facts onwhy that is happening.

An obviously annoyed Krugman replied, “This is not something you negotiate over…” Another panelist, Judy Woodruff, pointed out that the White House position is that Congress was the one that appropriated these funds – meaning the spending which the debt ceiling covers – and they should be the ones to “bite the bullet” and pay for them.

Of course, Ms. Woodruff is correct – the debt ceiling is not some kind of credit limit, it’s the way we authorize payment for debts the country has already accrued. And it has nothing to do with the “spending crisis” that Peggy Noonan is wringing her hands over. Krugman’s stance is that the GOP’s gamesmanship is “… a doomsday, this is really saying, ‘I will blow up world unless you give me what I want.’ And you don’t negotiate on that.” And he is 100% right about that. I hope that the White House stands firm on this and refuses to deal with the Republicans who would take this country’s economy hostage with no thought for anything but their own designs. That, IMO, is perilously close to treason.

See the video here…

3 Comments

Filed under POTUS

Is Fox News REALLY This Stupid?

Courtesy of ShortFormBlog.com

No, but their audience is.  Therefore, they have to play to their base…

Addicting Info

It would appear so. Or at least they’re hoping their audience is:

Just to be clear, the Trillion Dollar Platinum coin does not actually have to be one trillion dollars worth of platinum in the same way the paper and ink used to make a dollar bill is not actually worth one dollar .

Also to be clear, the TDP coin is an example of how ridiculous the GOP threat over the debt ceiling is.

Here’s the skinny on the coin: The Treasury can’t just print money all willy-nilly, BUT it can mint a commemorative coin of pretty much any kind. Soooooo…some intrepid blogger suggested that they do exactly that: mint a coin “worth” one trillion dollars, hand it over to the Federal Reserve and taaaadaaaaa! A trillion dollar account to draw from.

It’s a thought-exercise in the same exact way the debt ceiling is a thought-exercise. The difference between, minting the TDP coin and not raising the debt ceiling, according to Paul Krugman, is:

“A choice between two alternatives: one that’s silly but benign, the other that’s equally silly but both vile and disastrous. The decision should be obvious.” [Source]

Fox, of course, would be quite happy with the GOP crashing the economy because it would scare the bejeezus out of their viewers and that means ratings! To that end, they’ve decided that the TDP coin is a bad idea and either can’t be bothered asking an economist what it really means or delivering ridiculously bad information to their viewers.

Probably a bit of both.

Here’s the full explanation of the TDP coin and why the GOP/Fox/right wing media machine really wants it to go away. It’s very thorough and straight forward. Enjoy!

Comments Off

Filed under U.S. Politics

Obama the master strategist: How conservatives see the fiscal-cliff deal

Beneath that devil-may-care exterior lies a ruthless political Jedi... at least according to some conservatives.

With each of us possessing our own opinion about a host of political issues, the author of this instant article is pragmatic enough to know that everyone will not agree with him.

I happen to be one that does but undoubtedly I accept that I may well be in the “exception to the consensus” category.

I like the following article.  The young columnist, Ryu Spaeth‘s analogy comparing the POTUS’ fiscal cliff victory to a masterful Jedi move is both his reality and frankly, mine too…

The Week

To liberals, Obama is a hapless bungler when it comes to high-stakes negotiations. But the president is a ruthless operator in the conservative mind

Like beauty, politics is in the eye of the beholder. To wit: President Obama has been assailed by some liberal commentators for his supposedly incompetent handling of the fiscal cliff negotiations, particularly his inability to keep to his pledge to raise taxes on those making $250,000 a year. “The World’s Worst Poker Player,”read a headline on Paul Krugman’s blog. And as the budget battle in Congress moves toward the debt ceiling, many have suggested that Obama, abetted by his baffling inability to think strategically, has painted himself into a corner. “Obama claims, and seems to genuinely believe, that he won’t let Republicans jack him over the debt ceiling,” says Jonathan Chait at New York. “But if Republicans could hold the middle class tax cuts hostage, they’ll try to hold the debt ceiling hostage.”

In this view, Obama is the equivalent of Boy Blunder: He was not only incapable of winning big when his hand was strong, but has potentially set himself up for a bloodbath at the hands of the GOP. But if we take a trip to the other side of the op-ed page, a starkly different narrative merges. According to some conservatives, Obama is the most brilliant political operative in town — ruthless, cunning, unstoppable. This is how Charles Krauthammer at The Washington Post seesObama’s handling of the fiscal cliff talks:

Now he’s won. The old Obama is back. He must not be underestimated. He has deftly leveraged his class-war-themed election victory (a) to secure a source of funding (albeit still small) for the bloated welfare state, (b) to carry out an admirably candid bit of income redistribution and (c) to fracture the one remaining institutional obstacle to the rest of his ideological agenda.

Not bad for two months’ work. [Washington Post]

This version of Obama enjoys nothing more than to crush his enemies, see them driven before him, and revel in the lamentations of their women. Per Peggy Noonan at The Wall Street Journal:

He doesn’t want big bipartisan victories that let everyone crow a little and move forward and make progress. He wants his opponents in disarray, fighting without and within. He wants them incapable. He wants them confused…

The president intends to consistently beat his opponents and leave them looking bad, or, failing that, to lose to them sometimes and then make them look bad. That’s how he does politics….

In part it’s because he seems to like the tension. He likes cliffs, which is why it’s always a cliff with him and never a deal. He likes the high-stakes, tottering air of crisis. Maybe it makes him feel his mastery and reminds him how cool he is, unrattled while he rattles others. He can take it. Can they? [Wall Street Journal]

At this point, we would usually say something like, “The truth probably lies somewhere in the middle.” But in this case, the answer is obvious: Obama is clearly the love child of a Jedi Master and Sauron.

4 Comments

Filed under President Obama

What is the “fiscal cliff” everyone keeps talking about?

Thanks   from AMERICAblog for this very informative article.

 

Quick hits again — this is for your reference. There’s so much talk about the “fiscal cliff” that I thought some orientation would be in order.

(1) The actual “cliff” — such as it is — is a supposedly catastrophic set of budget cuts and tax increases. It includes a combo of the expiration of the Bush–Obama Tax Cuts of 2010, the kick-in of the forced “sequester” of budget funds, plus anything else they can cram in, like the extension of the debt ceiling, the deadline for which kicks in somewhere in 2013. They (the NeoLibs and MoveCons working together) will make this as complex as possible, so you can enjoy the “win” — pennies from billionaire heaven — and forget the losses — reduction of the safety net forever.

For more on what’s involved in the sequester, see this Yahoo explanation. Ignore the early-paragraph pimping of the badness and scan down for the detail.

(2) The name — The idea of a cliff is something you don’t want to go over. Keep that in mind; the fiscal cliff is a “very bad thing” according to deficit hawks.

(3) The plan — The fiscal cliff was designed by deficit hawks to force big reductions to the federal budget that they thought were needed.

You read me right. Read those last two paragraphs again, (2) and (3). Note the contradiction? Deficit hawks designed the combo of cliffdeadlines and sequesters, then want you to run screaming from it. Why would a serious deficit hawk run screaming from forced deficit reduction?

Answer: There are no serious deficit hawks in Washington; just serious safety net killers. The “fiscal cliff” wasn’t designed to force budget changes. It was designed to force scary budget changes as a cover for safety net reductions.

Paul Krugman has also noticed the contradiction and has more. Do click and read. Here’s a taste (my emphasis throughout):

The fiscal cliff poses an interesting problem for self-styled deficit hawks. They’ve been going on and on about how the deficit is a terrible thing; now they’re confronted with the possibility of a large reduction in the deficit, and have to find a way to say that this is a bad thing.

Here’s more from James Fallows, furrowing the same ground (h/t digby):

That the looming debt and deficit crisis is fake is something that, by now, even the most dim member of Congress must know. The combination of hysterical rhetoric, small armies of lobbyists and pundits, and the proliferation of billionaire-backed front groups with names like the “Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget” is not a novelty in Washington. It happens whenever Big Money wants something badly enough.

Big Money has been gunning for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid for decades – since the beginning of Social Security in 1935. The motives are partly financial: As one scholar once put it to me, the payroll tax is the “Mississippi of cash flows.” Anything that diverts part of it into private funds and insurance premiums is a meal ticket for the elite of the predator state.

The “elite of the predator state” — couldn’t have characterized Our Betters any better myself.

Yours in good information,

GP

Comments Off

Filed under U.S. Politics

KRUGMAN: ROMNEY “DOESN’T HAVE A PLAN, HE’S JUST FAKING IT.”

I’ve always been a Paul Krugman fan.  Here’s why…

Class Warfare Exists

Paul Krugman is on a roll calling out Mitt Romney for his false assertions about his tax and “jobs” plans.  There is a reason why a “large margin” of economists and 68 Nobel Laureates have said they prefer Obama over Romney (source).

But – I am amazed at the number of people who are even going to vote for Mitt Romney.  The election isn’t going to be a blowout even though I think the fundamentals are in Obama’s favor … but even if Obama had a blowout like never seen before and he won 60% of the American vote which has never been done in modern history (if ever) … that would still leave 40% of Americans actually voting for this guy.  That scares the hell out of me.  I can appreciate social issues being a core driver for some but when it comes to economic issues, income inequality, the social safety net or foreign policy …. Romney is a HUGE step backwards.

Krugman actually calls Romney a liar HERE; an excerpt:

But back to the Romney jobs plan. As many people have noted, the plan has five points but contains no specifics. Loosely speaking, however, it calls for a return to Bushonomics: tax cuts for the wealthy plus weaker environmental protection. And Mr. Romney says that the plan would create 12 million jobs over the next four years.

Where does that number come from? When pressed, the campaign cited three studies that it claimed supported its assertions. In fact, however, those studies did no such thing.

So when the campaign says that these three studies support its claims about jobs, it is, to use the technical term, lying — just as it is when it says that six independent studies support its claims about taxes (they don’t).

The most recent math by the tax policy center said that Romney’s tax plan to reduce income tax rates by 20% affecting 53% of Americans would still be short $3.7 trillion … yes – TRILLION dollars.  Mitt Romney has said that his plan will not add to the deficit and the only possible solution is that it would increase taxes on the middle class.  There is no other solution.  Read more on that HERE.

And as I’ve already shared HERE … Krugman’s absolutely correct … Romney’s plans are pure fantasy:

Regarding Romney’s Tax Plan:

  • The Congressional referee – the Joint Committee on Taxation says Romney’s plan is impossible HERE.
  • The former McCain economic adviser and current chief economist for Moody’s says the arithmetic “doesn’t work” HERE.
  • Politifact says Romney’s claim that 5 independent studies corroborate his math is “mostly false” HERE.
  • A Fox “journalist” actually says “How can you not tell the people these facts” HERE.
  • An independent study by the Brookings institution says Romney’s tax plan isn’t mathematically possible HERE.
  • Factcheck.org says his math is impossible in Romney’s Impossible Tax Promise.
  • I’ve given a very simple explanation that Romney’s plan will in fact cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans HERE.
  • The Tax Policy Center says Romney’s plan is a $5 trillion tax cut which would give anyone making more than $1 million a year at least an $87k tax cut HERE.
  • Bill Clinton says Romney’s tax math is impossible HERE.
  • Fox’s Chris Wallace calls out the Romney campaign for their math HERE.

Regarding Romney’s Jobs Plan:

The Washington Post did in fact call it a “bait and switch” … they said Romney’s tax plan “doesn’t add up”.  We’ve shard their article along with a history of Romney’s economic advisers who were also Bush’s main economic advisers HEREan excerpt:

This is a case of bait-and-switch. Romney, in his convention speech, spoke of his plan to create “12 million new jobs,” which the campaign’s white paper describes as a four-year goal.

But the candidate’s personal accounting for this figure in this campaign ad is based on different figures and long-range timelines stretching as long as a decade — which in two cases are based on studies that did not even evaluate Romney’s economic plan.  The numbers may still add up to 12 million, but they aren’t the same thing — not by a long shot.

In many ways, this episode offers readers a peek behind a campaign wizard’s curtain — and a warning that job-creation claims by any campaign should not be accepted at face value. The white paper at least has the credibility of four well-known economists behind it, but the “new math” of this campaign ad does not add up.

2 Comments

Filed under Mitt Romney Lies

Monday Blog Round Up 10-8-2012

How Reality Shapes Words

Bit of Good News for Obama

Video: Good jobs news drives right to delusion

Tracking Polls Show Debate Bounce for Romney

Israel Launches Airstrikes After Attacks From Gaza

Ad Watch: Obama attacks Romney’s Libya response

Video: Mixed messages on voter ID as Pa. slow to obey court

Mary Matalin Calls Paul Krugman A ‘Liar’ For Telling The Truth

Mitt Romney Looks To Cut Into Obama’s Early Voting Advantage

Gingrich Concedes Romney Wasn’t Honest About His Tax Plan During Debate

1 Comment

Filed under U.S. Politics