Skip to main content

View Diary: Killing Sacred Liberal Cows, or What Economists Think About the Economy (105 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  This is not fact- or reality-based at all (6+ / 0-)

    This is Nice Polite Republicanism and High Broderism at its most annoying.

    I think the Capitol Steps-derived (UGH!) "Hugh Jim Bissel"  poster should look into killing sacred David Brooks cows. Seriously look into it.

    Worthless nonsense, debunked in some parts decades ago.

    •  Your response is nonsense, unfortunately (0+ / 0-)

      Did you say why the ideas in the diary are not worth considering? No. Furthermore, these ideas haven't been "debunked decades ago" - perhaps in your mind, yes, but not in mainstream economic discussion that includes progressive economists.

      There are other ways to get a more progressive society than tax the rich with high marginal income tax rates and tax the corporations etc. I'm not saying you are representative of this thinking, I don't know, but in order to be a reality-based community we need to be open to discussion. Your worthless nonsense response was just that, worthless nonsense.

    •  What is fact-based (0+ / 0-)

      I know very little about the economy or economics in general.  I don't really have any agenda here, except to examine further the ideas present above.

      What is fact-based is that five economists all agreed on the value of these policy ideas.  That made me sit up and take notice.  It should get your attention as well.  Harvard, Cornell, Univ. of Chicago; we are not talking about Christian Jesus U., of a Rove-sponsored think tank.  And that these economists all agreed - which is pretty unusual in itself.

      It seems to me that if economists from major US universities agree on something, we should be considering it fully, and not simply writing it off as some kind of "hoax".

      I don't know what you are referring to with "sacred David Brooks cows".  If you give me some idea, I'll look into it.

      "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

      by Hugh Jim Bissell on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 12:41:12 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's nonsense in both title and claim (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Roger Fox, tardis10

        It's "a fact" that Andrew Breitbart said many things. That doesn't make the many things fact-based. Or reality-based. You seem, still, unclear on this concept. Beltway journalism's staple trope is that if "Democrats claim" gravity works and you also cite a Republican claiming it doesn't, your job is done, and you're fact-based. After all, it's a fact, that two people were quoted. It's a fact they disagree. That sort of, again, nonsense is absolutely valueless. It depends on believing that no matter where the little "center" moves to - and it's a Beltway media-defined center - the Truth is following it. There are always two sides (in this case a bogus center-left and a typical American market fundamentalist "right") and all sides are always equally right and wrong. Because of the magic law of complexity confuses me. This is explicitly, HJB, what David Broder built his career on. If you haven't seen Atrios - www.eschatonblog.com - dissect this, you should. He's an economist, by the way, and actually trained in the mainstream of American academic economics. He doesn't agree with most of the 5 allegedly reality-based economic dogmas you're supporting. Doesn't that, by what passes for "reasoning" with you, refute the ones he doesn't agree with? For that matter, Brad DeLong, another essentially centrist economist doesn't agree with all of them either. And this leaves out, not just the Keynesians, as pointed out above, but any number of others - your restriction is to the Washington Consensus and about a 1% deviation from it. You're probably entirely unaware of the spectrum of economics. How much of this do you think Rick Wolff would agree with? Or Jim Gailbraith? Heck, Paul Krugman? Joe Stiglitz? Krugman and Stiglitz both won that "Economics Nobel" that Americans set such great store by. What about Prout? Ravi Batra's variation? The entire "post-autistic economics" school and the Real-World Economics Review?

        Several decent and thoughtful specific refutations have been posted above. It's not worth my time duplicating them. I mention the Capitol Steps because they exemplify the "partisanship is the problem, both sides need to be parodied equally, etc. etc." nonsense that's put the US in the dire straits it's in. Real reality, vs. Beltway "fact-based" and Beltway "reality-based", again, nonsense, is quite often partisan.

        Finally, you are in no way, shape or form killing any liberal sacred cows with this nonsense. You are simply navelgazing and showing what a Washington Consensus, American neoliberal bubble Beltway obsessed people live in.

        Hope that helped.

        •  Krugman and Stiglitz understand what actually (0+ / 0-)

          works.

          Repackaging 40 to 100 year old failed policy, and then smacking me cause I dont respect you for that... well hit me again. I love it.

          One detail VAT. It is inherently regressive from the get go . Adding deductions, exemptions and shelters just adds complexity in the attempt to make VAT progressive. And when one is done, one still has in its foundation a regressive system.

          FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

          by Roger Fox on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 03:29:52 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  You mischaracterize me n/t (0+ / 0-)

          "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

          by Hugh Jim Bissell on Thu Nov 15, 2012 at 03:40:36 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site