Paul Krugman took on Joe Scarborough and Charlie Rose on Rose's show last night.
Last edited Tue Mar 5, 2013, 09:03 PM - Edit history (2)
Joe Scarborough appeared on the Charlie Rose show to try to 'take on' Paul Krugman. Krugman may or may not have anticipated he would be taking on both Charlie Rose and Scarborough (at imes BOTH Scarborough and Rose were yelling at Krugman) - but that's okay.
Scarborough is a practiced bullshitter, while Krugman is an economist who is entirely focussed on understanding how the economy actually works. He is not a trained debater - and certainly not trained in dealing with a bullshitter like Scarborough. Scarborough certainly had Krugman beat on the volume of his voice. but when Scarborough pointed out that Krugman expressed concerns about the deficit during the Clinton administration - supposedly showing Krugman to be inconsistent - Krugman said (not an exact quote): ' Those were different circumstances then. [font size="3"]We hadn't just been through the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. The economy was booming and THAT was the time to pay down the debt.'[/font]
Scarborough has been saying Krugman is out in left field saying that the Debt is a long term problem and that we should first address the unacceptably high unemployment and low economic growth - in other words - screw austerity stimulate the economy to get job creation going and bring down the unemployment rate.
If Krugman was a better debater (but then being a better debater, maybe he wouldn't have been the Nobel prize winning economist that he is. Krugman is focussed on finding out how the economy actually works - not in honing his rhetorical skills) he might have said:
[font color="#3333aa"] "If we get the economy growing at good rate and bring down unemployment we will be in a better, stronger position, that much sooner, to start bringing down the Public Debt. If we do NOT stimulate the economy NOW it will take much longer before we can really take more aggressive steps to bring down the debt. THe sooner we get back to something like full employment, Government revenues will climb and we will be in a much better position to pay down the debt."[/font]
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/krugman-scarborough-clash-over-debt-spending-on-charlie
Scarborough was also trying to say that Krugman is way out in left field. Krugman told him that Alan Blinder (formerly served on President CLinton's Council of Economic advisors) was saying pretty much the same thing He (Krugman) was saying about addressing the debt and the need for action NOW on the lack or job creation and high unemployment.
Here is Blinder's article on the Krugman Scarborough 'debate' (which has been going on for a while): JOe Scarborough appeared on the Charlie Rose show to try to 'take on' Paul Krugman. Krugman may or may not have anticipated he would be taking on both Charlie Rose and Scarborough - but that's okay.
Scarborough is a practiced bullshitter, while Krugman is an economist who is entirely focussed on understanding how the economy actually works. He is not a trained debater - and certainly not trained in dealing with a bullshitter like Scarborough. Scarborough certainly had Krugman beat on the volume of his voice. but when Scarborough pointed out that Krugman expressed concerns about the deficit during the Clinton administration - supposedly showing Krugman to be inconsistent - Krugman said (not an exact quote): That was a different circumstance then. We hadn't just been through the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. ' The economy was booming and it THEN was the time to pay down the debt.'
Scarborough has been saying Krugman is out in left field saying that the Debt is a long term problem and that we should first address the unacceptably high unemployment and low economic growth - in other words - screw austerity stimulate the economy to get job creation going and bring down the unemployment rate.
If Krugman was a better debater (but then being a better debater, maybe he wouldn't have been the Nobel prize winning economist that he is. Krugman is focussed on finding out how the economy actually works - not in honing his rhetorical skills) he might have said:
[font color="#3333aa"] "If we get the economy growing at good rate and bring down unemployment we will be in a better, stronger position, that much sooner, to start bringing down the Public Debt. If we do NOT stimulate the economy NOW it will take much longer before we can really take more aggressive steps to bring down the debt. THe sooner we get back to something like full employment, Government revenues will climb and we will be in a much better position to pay down the debt."[/font]
(my emphases)
Morning Joe's Accuracy Deficit - Alan Blinder
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/morning-joes-accuracy-deficit-88376.html#ixzz2Mi8FlKBC
Joe Scarborough Makes Up Economist Alan Blinder's Defense Of Joe Scarborough - MediaMatters
Joe Scarborough dishonestly cited Princeton economist Alan Blinder to bolster his campaign to undermine Nobel laureate Paul Krugman and accuse Democrats of being anti-math.
Scarborough has been engaged in a rhetorical assault on Krugman ever since the New York Times columnist appeared on MSNBC's Morning Joe and called on lawmakers to focus on economic growth and job creation in the short-term, pivoting to long-term deficits only after the economy is stronger. Scarborough has spent weeks mocking Krugman, comparing him to National Rifle Association head Wayne LaPierre and calling Krugman a deficit denier.
In a February 15 Politico column, Scarborough turned his attention to "bloggers," who he said were "mixing up the most basic concepts of economics" in order to back Krugman. Scarborough took particular offense at what he called "a fabulously misleading Business Insider post that claimed to list 11 economists who shared Krugman's debt-denying views." Scarbough continued:
[div class="excerpt" style="border: 1px solid #000000;"]Never mind the fact that most of the links provided actually undercut Krugman's reckless position and supported my view that the most pressing fiscal crisis is not next year's deficit but next decade's debt.
Blinder, a former Fed vice chairman and Princeton economics professor, warned of "truly horrific problems" caused by long-term debt, health care costs and interest on the debt. Paul Krugman's Princeton colleague even shared my conclusion that the coming Medicare crisis will be so great that Democrats won't be able to tax their way out of it.
Far from supporting Mr. Krugman's extreme position, the link to Professor Blinder's New Yorker article undercuts his Princeton colleague's exaggerated "In-the-end-we'll-all-be-dead" approach to U.S. long-term debt.
It is intellectually dishonest for Scarborough to cite Blinder as a fellow traveler.
Here's what Blinder wrote in the Atlantic piece that Business Insider cited (Scarborough incorrectly sourced the column to The New Yorker):
[div class="excerpt" style="border: solid 1px #000000;"]In plain English, the costs of everything on which the federal government spends money except health care and interest -- and that includes Social Security, defense, you name it -- are projected to fall over time as a share of GDP. The message is clear: America doesn't have a generalized spending problem that requires severe cuts across the board. We have, instead, a massive problem of exploding health care costs.
Oh, and also, here's a link to Alan Blinder's article in the Atlantic on the deficit entitled:
How to Worry About the Deficit: (1) Don't; (2) Wait a Few Years; (3) Then Worry About Healthcare Costs
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/01/how-to-worry-about-the-deficit-1-dont-2-wait-a-few-years-3-then-worry-about-healthcare-costs/272521/
5 Things Charlie Rose -- And You -- Should Know For His Scarborough-Krugman Debate
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/03/04/5-things-charlie-rose-and-you-should-know-for-h/192897
= new reply since forum marked as read
[font size="5"]JoeBlow[/font]
"The louder they talk the less they have to say"_Bill USA