If you like debating economics, especially Krugman's economics, I can direct you to a good place...

Economics Political Theory
1

I am on a christian forum right now called CARM. We have a Krugman worshipper there now, and well, I am ok at this economics stuff, but I am not the best. I could use some help.

Here is the link.

Here is a snippet of the conversation so far

Me: More than Krugman. I don’t operate under the fallacy that economic prosperity is the product of deficit spending. Krugman does.

Let’s say there is an island, and there are 4 people on the island. One builds huts, one hunts and fishes, one cultivates vegetables and one doesn’t do anything, but he consumes the products of the other three.

Krugman’s “economics”, stripped of the fluff, says that the very most important person on that island for the prosperity of all of them is the one who does nothing but consume. Without the demand created by his consumption, the economy would fail.

So, I might not be the most brilliant bulb on the Christmas tree, but at least I am radiating something, unlike Krugman.

My Opponent: Well, if the other three just make and make and make stuff, and nobody buys it, what happens then? Souinds like he is on to something.

Then, while talking about predicting the current downturn, the opponent dude posted an article from the Nation Magazine wherein the author pointed out that Krugman predicted this current recession as far back as 1999. I responded by saying that, to this day, Krugman hasn’t come out with a scientific explanation, based on empirical evidence, that explains the current recession.

2

If no one wants it, no one wants it. D’oh. Is he proposing to ram it down people’s throats?

3

I forgot to mention, I am Steve and Leah on that forum, if you decide to sign up and debate. One caviat though is that the moderators of that forum are very, very serious about the rules.

It’s a pretty good forum now. A few years ago it was terrible.

4

That conversation petered out, but there is another that is more stimulating.

Obama the Next FDR?

Here is a sample (this will be like red meat to some of you):

Quote:

Is Obama going to repeat all of FDR’s mistakes that made the Great Depression last an extra 10 years?

What supporters of this speculative history neglect to mention is that if FDR hadn’t pushed the government to involve itself as strongly as it did, the Depression would have ended earlier for the United States… because the country as a whole would have collapsed. 10 years of depression (even assuming the speculation to be correct, which it probably isn’t) beats a failed state by any measure. We were closer to failure as a state than most revisionists want to admit. Truthfully, we need an FDR today–and the closest we’ve got is Obama. I hope he’s a quick study.

Quote:

How does stealing wealth from productive private sector entities and creating pointless unproductive gov’t projects stimulate the economy exactly?

Governments are more effective at promoting economic activity. It’s not like the private sector is being productive right now.

Quote:

Shouldn’t we just cut taxes and decrease spending?

Usually, you want your government to be in the habit of engaging in countercyclical intervention in the economy; increase taxes when times are good, borrow money and inject it into the economy when times are bad. This works rather well, so long as successive administrations follow through with this policy. Unfortunately, Reagan and subsequent Republican administrations have borrowed too much to allow this to be a viable option at this point in time. In the current situation, our credit limit simply isn’t high enough to allow us to borrow our way out of our present economic troubles.

The only solution to this problem that results in the continuation of the US government is to increase taxes and cut uncessary overhead. “Overhead” would be things like military spending. Cutting social programs, OTOH, is simply insane, since that redistribution;

A) doesn’t cause money to leave the economy as a whole.
B) helps preserve social stability during economic disaster.
C) creates real jobs, and produces real economic output.

5

I get the same thing on Catholic Answers. We get alot of marxist, keynesians, or other leftists that monopolize the ‘social justice’ forums. Recently however, there was a discussion on libertarianism that was surprisingly positive. We even have some anarcho-capitalists who post there.

6

holy schnikies I also noticed that little jem on CA awhile ago! It’s a small internet after all.

In hindsight, it would be better for the church to just state that social justice theory isn’t covered under infallibility or just never comment on social problems at all.

7

The Problem is that all three workers are consumers as well. What gives him the authority to get their product for nothing?

8

Krugman’s economics explained:

http://www.thepeoplescube.com/red/viewforum.php?f=23

This is supposed to be satire, but it reads almost word-for-word like a Krugman column.

9

What I mean to say is that ABC create their own demand. They really have no need of Ds other than to get rid of any excess. Hes probably the ancestor of someone important, and they give reverence. There is no argument really. The most important member of society is you. You make it go. You create, trade, and consume the goods.