Quote of the Week – Dear Paul Krugman: 'I'll see you in hell'

“I don’t like to commit myself about heaven and hell – you see, I have friends in both places.”
– Mark Twain

He is a real Nobel Prize winner and no better than the faux winners; it is what I expect.

Aw, Anthony, let it go. I KNOW it has to be hard dealing with personal attacks as you continue to fight the good fight. But it is a good fight, one well worth undertaking. And history will show your efforts were in a righteous cause.
The challenge for everyone is trying to ensure that the AGW program does not achieve its apparent goal of pointlessly bankrupting the developed world and impoverishing the developing world, leaving literally billions of people to suffer needlessly.
You have the high ground. I hope you will not become discouraged. Your cause is just, and the work you, and others of like mind, continue will prove out in the end.
Keep the faith.
Felix

Don’t waste any pity on him. He and his ilk have done great damage to the everyday hardworking person who has had to pay a personal cost from the policies they have pushed.

I get so tired of being called a “denier”. It only means that the name caller has nothing else to back up their agrument than resorting to these tactics. And now I am being condemned to hell because I dare question them? Wow – it reinforces the fact that they cannot base their opinions of actual science. I ask for science. I am called a denier. I look at them and say – You are the denier. You are denying me the right to question their opinion. I also get so tired of their self righteousness. And hypocrisy.

I and about 10 friends have an agreement… the first guy down there gets in line for ACDC tickets. Anyone else want in?

Maybe Krugman can stop by the circle of Hell reserved for commies and visit Obama’s dad and Uncle Frank. “Hey, guys, good work on young Barry!”

Did I mention that I won the Nobel Prize? Can anyone guess the carbon footprint of my ego?

Paul Krugman first know thyself.
Second know more of your own direction and you will not have such a blunt sore nose from all the crashes.

Krugman.
NY Times.
What more need be said?

Krugman once was a respectable economist, but he stopped contributing anything of economic value when he started writing for the NY Times.
A fun game is to contrast what he writes in his column against his own academic writings from before he devolved into being a political hack.
James Taranto at the WSJ gives a fine example here, refuting an argument in Krugman’s column with a quote from his own textbook.
Another equally fun game is compare Krugman’s about-faces on topics depending on whether it’s the Red team or the Blue team in charge.
Here Alex Tabarrok points out Krugman’s alarmism over the the catastrophic nature of the federal debt under Bush (circa 2003) vs. his nonchalance over the much larger federal debt under Obama (circa 2012)

JDC says:
March 15, 2013 at 12:01 pm
Careful what you say. From the readers here I’ve learned very much of scientific value, but also on occasion read a few comments bordering on bigotry concerning the scientific abilities of the nonbelievers among us and our ancestors.

That is not very fair of Krugman. His world view does not even allow a person to “deny global warming” out of simple ignorance, much less having sincerely held science based beliefs. It is always “personal gain” or “political reasons.”
I would expect him to say the same about those who deny fiscal stimulus. Presumably they are just plain evil. They couldn’t be motivated by cogent economic arguments, could they?
If he was ten times better at economics than he is at climate science, he might achieve mediocrity. Alas. . .

I guess Krugman thinks he has more authority on Heaven and Hell than the new Pope.

Or you could tell Krugman how to find Michael Mann (many years hence, I hope and trust after they have both enjoyed very long natural lives with time to see how many of their ideas were proved wrong)….. Reminiscent of Hamlet, when the King is asking where Polonius is,

Claudius. Where is Polonius?
Hamlet. In heaven. Send thither to see. If your messenger find him not
there, seek him i’ th’ other place yourself….

It’s funny how Krugman sees market failure in any free activity which then requires a government action to correct it, e.g. “driving during congestion puts a burden on other drivers so the government should charge a large fee for it.”
It is not an “externality” that I happen to drive home when a lot of other people drive home. It’s society and how we work together and build schedules and have the freedom to live in one area but work in another.
As for heaven or hell, well, lots of different beliefs. I think that, when this life ends, God’s grace is large enough for all of us. If I’m wrong, I’ll be in big trouble — or there won’t be any me. Shrodinger’s heaven??

Krugman walks the party line. Fiscal spending has not been a significant factor in any recovery since 1950, and it is not working now. Didn’t work for Japan and now I learn that it didn’t work for Spain. Romper and Romper 2004 is an interesting read, as is Taylor’s article on the housing crisis. Taylor uses a model to show how the housing bubble would have been much less severe had the Fed not held interest rates as low for as long as they did. It’s a model and I don’t know how much better econ models are compared to GCMs but it is interesting anyway. Benanke says the interest rates don’t correlate to the housing bubble but the housing market crashed when rates were ratcheted up. Almost as fun as the climate debate..The left without empirical data holding on to a theory despite its obvious failures.

Once again, the problem here is talking out of one’s expertise. I have no doubt that Krugman is an excellent economist, and his Nobel (well, not quite Nobel, but let’s drop that area of bickering) is well earned, even though such a “Nobel” has crowned highly praised economists from all sides of thought ; that doesn’t qualify him in the least to pontificate in quantum physics, cosmology or Earth sciences. In all subjects apart from Economy, he is at par with any educated person, and certainy below par with anyone who has a good Science degree. He is no “scientist” (meaning “hard science”), only an amateur in such subjects.

Paul Krugman is not liberal.
He is a socialist, fascist, communist, TOTALITARIAN

geologyjim says:
March 15, 2013 at 11:37 am
Krugman is ample evidence that a Nobel Prize is no indication of either intellegence, accomplishment, or common sense. There’s a reason he’s earned the nickname “Ferret-face”
###
Wrong end.

Krugman’s columns are tired rants reminding us why we need to conform.

“The Conscience of a Liberal” is quite a title. Anyone who remembers Krugman’s piece marking the 10th anniversary of 9/11, on which he disabled reader commentary, knows that the man has no conscience. I personally find him to be a despicable human being.

Sorry Anthony, but Hell is not hot enough for the likes of Krugman, Mann, Phil Jones and all the CAGW/Man-Caused Climate Change advocates. The hoax they continue to perpetrate on mankind is deserving of the worst punishment imaginable (or should that be unimaginable) in the afterlife.

The man has no conscience.

“Fiscal spending has not been a significant factor in any recovery since 1950,”
Fiscal spending has NEVER led to any recovery, significant or otherwise.

The burning at first would probably be worst
But in time the pain may soften
Whilst those who are bored with praising the Lord
Would become more so by praising him often.

To Mr Paul Krugman
From Saint Peter, Pearly Gates Retirement Estate
Dear Mr Krugman,
I am instructed by a 2:1 vote of the Trinity to reply to your Epistle. You wish to assign suitably qualified applicants to join you in The Other Place (TOP). You are not delegated to make these decisions – I am. If this demarcation dispute recurs, I will send you to TOP before the cock crows three times.
You must understand that these are times of stringency. The flames of Hell have been shown to be major contributors to CAGW. It is necessary to seek less polluting fuels like MSM newspaper and modern artworks. Indeed they make very good torture material in their own right.

Just been re-reading the Divine Comedy, but I can’t seem to find the circle assigned to deniers.

Krugman comes across as a pathetic bully, and regardless of where his soul ends up he will be remembered as such by rational people. That’s good enough.

There is no Nobel prize for economics, it is officially called the “Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel”. Economists bought themselves a prize to lend credility to their otherwise useless and quasi-fraudulent cargo-cult. that is not to say their aren’t bright economists like Ross McKitrick, but their utility stems from astute observation of human behaviour, and has very little to do with wild imaginings of economics. There is nothing empirical to see here, move along, move along.

He’ll is an awful place. Don’t take it lightly.
Krugman is a former advisor to ENRON. ’nuff said.

Anthony –
You are doing a great service with this blog, and my hope is that you are reaching enough people with it to spur some popular, grass-roots action to fight global warming alarmism.
As I read the posts here, it is so plain that there are so many of us laymen, as well as practicing scientists who can see through the AGW fantasy. But venting on a blog isn’t going to get the job done of putting a stop to this craziness. We skeptics need to organize, compel the media to give us air time and front-page space (by court action if necessary), and advertise our views and our evidence against AGW to the publlic in any way we can – everything from billboards to bumper stickers saying “Fight Global Warming ALARMISM” (and if anyone regularly posting here has any betrter ideas, why, please come forth with them – I can’t think of everything or be entirely sure what I’m suggesting would work).
Anthony, I live in Chico myself, and I would welcome an opportunity to meet with you and discuss what we can do to build up some mojo in the fight against the AGW craziness, You can reach me by email at the_last_composer@yahoo.com.
Sincerely, Chad Wozniak

numerobis wrote;
March 15, 2013 at 1:33 pm
“Anthony, it’s a bit disconcerting trying to keep track of your position. Sometimes you are very clear that there’s no global warming — in this post for example, where you think that Krugman is targeting you. Other times you swear up and down that you believe there *is* global warming, but not much, and anyway it’ll be a good thing.”
I am also confused Anthony, does the “greenhouse effect” exist and human contributions will be minor, or is this basic underpinning of “climate science” incorrect and we have absolutely nothing to worry about ?
Perhaps you are still evaluating the evidence ?
I certainly respect the policies of your blog and the “crowd sourcing” aspect has hopefully spread some different perspectives about the topic to your readers. Perhaps it’s time to allow a few of those “cranks” to make their case that the “greenhouse effect” has been mischaracterized and it in fact has no effect on the average temperature of the Earth ?
Willis has certainly explained how he believes it (the GHE) works many times, maybe it’s time for the “point – counterpoint” stage of your blog ?
Just thinking here, I sleep soundly every night knowing that if there is a Hell I won’t reside there after I depart because my beliefs have always been based on finding the truth.
Cheers, Kevin.

“Progressives” seem to be in a bit of a pickle. They don’t want to accept a personal god, but they still want their idea of justice to be carried out by a non existent god in a non existent afterlife. Maybe that is why they are working so hard to replace god with a religion of socialism. The one true moral code for all of mankind and for all time has been delivered by the prophet Marx, and heretics must be punished.

I suspect that “punished in the afterlife” was chosen instead of “burn in hell” because even Satan doesn’t dare emit CO2 any more.

I don’t normally put silliness like this on here, but I can’t get the song out of my mind.
“I’m a believer” as sung by Paul Krugman (with apologies to the Monkees and Neil Diamond)
I thought truth was only true in fairytales
Meant for someone else but not for me
Deniers were out to get me
That’s the way it seemed
Disappointment haunted all my dreams
Chorus w 86 part harmony (the Consensus Scientist Singers)-
Then I read Mike Mann, now I’m a believer
Not a trace of doubt in my mind
I’m in love, I’m a believer
I couldn’t leave CAGW if I tried
(yeah that last line is a little rough. Anyone have a short word for CAGW?)

or:
in the Mann-ipulated Lie

or:
My ego’s twice the normal size.

or to bring it ’round to Krugman’s original statement:
…You’re a deceiver and you’ll fry.

KevinK says (March 15, 2013 at 6:01 pm): ‘Perhaps it’s time to allow a few of those “cranks” to make their case that the “greenhouse effect” has been mischaracterized and it in fact has no effect on the average temperature of the Earth ?’
Been there, done that. For a recent example, check the very long comment thread to this article:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/02/06/the-r-w-wood-experiment/
Enjoy.

or:
I backed Enron on the sly.

Hans Erren says:
March 15, 2013 at 4:29 pm
Anthony,
“Hell” is actually a small village near Trondheim Airport in Norway, It freezes over every year.
I laughed when I read this! I’ve been to Hell! And back! For real, in 1991! If I remember right there was a sign on the train station that read “Gods Ekspedisjon”. Really! (If you know a little Norwegian you’ll know the message has nothing to do with religion) Anyway, still laughing….

Robertv says:
March 15, 2013 at 11:51 am
Schwartz Slams Krugman

Schwartz is ignorant of the fact that his country, Spain, gave up its sovereign currency for a foreign currency, the Euro. What the hell does he expect? He’s a g.d. slave to the EU now, a union of unelected officials without a governing body that can set fiscal policy.

“Dear Paul Krugman,
I’ll see you in hell.”
No you won’t – you won’t be going there! 😉

Matt in Houston says:
March 15, 2013 at 8:55 pm
Mr. Krugman is criminally incompetent at best as an economist.

You need to do your homework. The problem is that Krugman hasn’t gone for enough. You don’t know zip about the economy, so quit repeating Sean Hannity nonsense. Check out neweconomicperspectives.org.

Oh Well. I’m sorry Anthony’s hearing Issues probably preclude appreciating the foreboding, heavy, low scale Piano Intro to this: Dum – Dah, Dah Dum Dum
Ballad of a Thin Mann
You walk into the room
With your Dataset in your hand
You see somebody measuring
And you say, “Who is that man ?”
You try so hard
But you don’t understand
Just what they’ll say
When you get published.
Because something’s not happening here
And you really wish it was
Don’t you, Mister Mann ?
You raise up your head
And you say, “CO2’s gonna Kill”
And somebody points to you and says
“It Will?”
And you say, “Here’s A Hockey Stick ”
And somebody else says, “You’re Sick”
And you say, “Oh my God
Am I here all alone ?”
Because something’s not happening here
And you really wish it was
Don’t you, Mister Mann ?
You Cash in your Paycheck
And you go watch the geek
Who immediately walks up to you
When he hears you speak
And says, “How does it feel
To be such a freak ?”
And you say, “Mr Vice President?”
As he hands you a Grant.
Because something’s not happening here
And you really wish it was
Don’t you, Mister Mann ?
You have many contacts
Among the Tree-Ring- Jacks
Who make up facts
When someone attacks your imagination
But nobody has any respect
Anyway they already expect
You To all give a check
To Climate-Model-Inventing Organizations.
You’ve been with the PHD’s
And they’ve all liked your looks
With great Alarmists you have
Discussed Deniers and Crooks
You’ve been through all of
AL Gore’s books
You’re not all that well read,
It’s well known.
Because something’s not happening here
And you really wish it was
Don’t you, Mister Mann ?
Well, the Bullshit-Finders, they come up to you
And then they kneel
One is named Willis
Their Minds are like Steel
And without further notice
They ask you how it feels
And say, “Here are your errors back,
Thanks for the loan”.
Because something’s not happening here
And you really wish it was
Don’t you, Mister Mann ?
Now you see this one-Eared Blogger
Shouting the word “What?”
And you say, “For what reason ?”
And he says, “Your Method Sucks”
And you say, “What does this mean ?”
And he screams back, “Show Your Stuff
Give me some proofs
Or else go home”.
Because something’s not happening here
And you really wish it was
Don’t you, Mister Mann ?
Well, you walk into the room
Like a Big-Shot and then you frown
You put your Hockey Stick in your pocket
And your Equations on the ground
There ought to be a law
Against you comin’ around
You should be made
To learn Classical Science Method.
Because something’s not happening here
And you really wish it was
Don’t you, Mister Mann ?

Apologies to the Gentleman from Hibbing, Minn., Bob Dylan; ‘Ballad of a Thin Man’.

The estimable Matt Ridley personally thanked me for alerting him to the 7/12/12 YouTube of economist Pedro Schwartz “schooling” Paul Krugman in Barcelona. The clip relates to Master Krugman’s penchant for opining outside his area of expertise.

E.M.Smith says: “… drunken sailor…”
Having been a sailor and on one or more occasions been unsober I would like to point out I was spending my own money and I knew when to stop. 🙂

I am an atheist and a classical liberal. To lump all liberals under the same banner as socialists, communists and Marxists is as categorically wrong as to lump conservatives with the Religious Right, Nazism, creationists, extreme nationalism and Holocaust Deniers.
Paul Krugman does not speak for liberals – he speaks only for himself.
In my view of environmentalism and the global warming panic in general, it is striking to me how much of the belief systems of climate alarm cannot be rationally distinguished from creationism and apocalyptic beliefs regarding the End of the World (which are as old as humanity, as far as I can tell). Thus James Hansen, who is a Christian, has a perfect symmetry between his repeated warnings about saving the planet from the effects of fossil fuel uses and the coming Judgment Day as described in the Bible with lurid descriptions of plagues, earthquakes and global upheaval.
But Christians I know are hardly in the same camp as James Hansen. Ross McKitrick is a self-described believer in God and yet finds the claims made about the climate and the environment to be as exaggerated and ill-thought out as I.
What is most striking about the debates surrounding climate science has been the complete lack of self-criticism or even self-analysis as one preposterous meme of impending doom as followed another.
Many people who don’t believe in any God or Gods find the claims of the climate apocalyptics to be preposterous and false and a form of disguised fundamentalist religious beliefs that they have already rejected, even though some of those who make such claims are self-described atheists.
I think there are rational people who believe in God and equally rational people who do not. Nor do people’s belief systems stay static over time. I once thought that the claims of global warming to be credible – now I do not. I think James Lovelock has moved considerably from positions he held even five years ago
My observation is that most people cling to their innermost beliefs about the world and select those facts or observations that reinforce those beliefs and discount or ignore those that do not. Capitalists and socialists do this. Liberals, socialists, Marxists and conservatives do this. Atheists and Theists do this. Fox News and CNN and the BBC do this. No-one is wholly orthodox or completely rational in all of their thinking.
Carl Sagan was a wonderful teacher of the history of science and the progress of scientific discovery. He was also a believer in the baleful effects of nuclear winter and promoted global warming panic. Isaac Newton made such incredible discoveries about physics and maths that everybody today learns his science and mathematical in schools and colleges to this day. But he was also a proponent of preposterous nonsense about the Bible and Ancient Egypt. Johannes Kepler was a superb observational astronomer who nevertheless cast horoscopes and produced streams of nonsense about supposed “celestial spheres” in the Heavens using the seven platonic solids.
I have lots in common in terms of outlook with Anthony Watts, Steve McIntyre, Ross McKitrick, Willis Eschenbach and Roy Spencer. But I have criticisms of certain beliefs or viewpoints with all of them. Sometimes I have criticized them on the Internet for saying certain things.
But you know what? I think we’d have great creative arguments about lots of things and still respect each other in the morning.
I think its called maturity.

Never mind…Schwartz/Krugman imported above at 3/15 @ 11:51

Henry@Leo Morgan
The examples you cite are communism, not socialism. There is a big difference> With communism there is no incentive to work hard.
Examples of countries where the per capita income are the highest in the world in the order as far as I can remember are: Luxembourg, Switzerland, Denmark, Netherlands, Norway, Japan, Sweden, Finland, Germany. These are the countries where the income distribution between the highest earners and the lowest earners is the lowest, Most lately Brazil has been doing quite well in bringing the ginnie factor down by introducing good socialist policies. Hence they are growing tremendously. My own country of residence, South Africa, is not doing well in this area. Even the tax policy here of the ANC has made richer people richer..Hence we are suffering from a lot of strikes and social unrest.The ANC is not a socialist party, as far as I am concerned, and neither is the opposition. Perhaps we should start a new party here with a clear social program…..
Henry @ John A
I am a Christian, I am a socialist, I don’t believe in AGW or CAGW. I believe CO2 and H2O are like my father and mother and anyone wanting less of either must be daft.
Note, as in my reply to Leo Morgan, I am those things because I have verified all the facts available. As to my Christian faith, I have related in my previous post here what convinced me. Like you I also believed in AGW but I was not so sure anymore, when, one day I arrived at WUWT. I therefore decided to conduct my own statistical test,
http://blogs.24.com/henryp/2013/02/21/henrys-pool-tables-on-global-warmingcooling/
The facts are clear. We are cooling, globally, and it is going to get worse.

DirkH – Thanks for the link to the Rio+2 document, “World In Transition: A Social Contract for Sustainability,” from the German Advisory Council on Global Change. It is heart-warming to read such global overlord strategizing as this, at page 20: -well worth readnig to see what these totalitarians actually believe–
“Equitable new global system (high ambition level):In accordance with the global social contract for sustainability, the ultimate goal of a revised global governance architecture must be the creation of a new, equitable global system. Its institutions must put the international community in a position that leaves them capable of appreciating the complex interdependencies of the global society within the scope determined by the limits imposed by our planet, as soon as within the first half of the 21st century, to allow for timely and adequate response. This demanding process is comparable with the embedding of market dynamics in constitutional states, democracies and welfare states during the last great transformation into an industrialised society, which led to the stabilisation and acceptance of this new form of society in the first place.
“Politically, this requires a historically unprecedented transcending of established sovereignty concepts and purely power-driven global politics in favour of ensuring the long-term availability of global commons. Sustainable strategies and concepts must be developed for this in order to embed sustainable global development in transnational democratic structures, to formulate answers to the 21st century questions regarding global equity and distribution of resources, and, not least, to be able to claim world-wide legitimacy.
“This means concrete academic search processes, for example by global governance theoreticians, international law experts, cosmopolitans, transnationalists and philosophers of justice to formulate legitimate and realisable norms, rules and procedures which, all together, could form the basis of an ideal global social contract. This would be something of a quantum leap for civilisation, on par for example with the transition of the feudal systems to constitutional states and democracy. Comparably to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, however, it should in principle also be possible to reach a universal consensus regarding human civilisation‘s ability to survive within the natural boundaries imposed by planet Earth. This necessarily presupposes an extensive ‘Global Enlightenment’, which must be aimed towards promoting cooperative behaviour and accelerating the formation of relevant global social standards and debate. The WBGU strongly advises the use of the coming Rio+20 Conference as a historic chance for such an enlightenment process.”

HenryP says:
March 16, 2013 at 6:24 am
“There is a big difference> With communism there is no incentive to work hard.”
Here in Germany there is no incentive to work hard either as the marginal income tax rate is 70%.
As requested by the communist manifesto – high tax progression. That’s the main reason Germany has lower wages than Italy or Spain. We have simply given up fighting for wage increases.
“Examples of countries where the per capita income are the highest in the world in the order as far as I can remember are: Luxembourg, Switzerland, Denmark, Netherlands, Norway, Japan, Sweden, Finland, Germany.”
Oh, you can look that up in the CIA world fact book. There are many many countries you left out, the USA is 30% higher than the Western European economies; you left out Singapore as well, probably doesn’t fit the narrative. Luxembourg is not exactly the posterchild example of a socialist nation either as it is basically a city with a bunch of banks.

thelastdemocrat says:
March 16, 2013 at 7:57 am
“DirkH – Thanks for the link to the Rio+2 document, “World In Transition: A Social Contract for Sustainability,” from the German Advisory Council on Global Change. It is heart-warming to read such global overlord strategizing as this, at page 20: -well worth readnig to see what these totalitarians actually believe–”
Please remove beverages from the proximity of sensitive electronic equipment before proceeding to read – Thanks.
When I mentioned comic book supervillains, I completely forgot that Schellnhuber is…
…a comic book hero now.
http://notrickszone.com/2013/02/06/climate-science-turns-comic-john-schellnhuber-now-depicted-as-planet-saving-comic-hero-in-germany/

HenryP says:
March 16, 2013 at 9:26 am
“@DirkH
You are OK in Germany. USA is red,, a lot worse, probably 30% lower, not higher.”
You were talking about GDP/capita, now you bring up an equality map.
So I take it that for you wealth is not important but it is important to you that everybody else gets exactly the same as you.
I notice that the wikipedia has no data for Cuba. That is interesting. I guess when you exclude the nomenklatura, they have perfect equality; when you include the nomenklatura, perfect inequality.
A bizarre result, but typical for socialism.

Krugman using an elitist snobbery joust to demean and ridicule…
Sounds to me like he knows that he and his ilk have lost the battle and they are lashing about like a fish out of water… Gasping for their last breath..

To those that think that Socialism is a solution to economic inequality, prepare to cover your eyes, and quickly skip to the next post.
The only way that Socialism can ever improve econmic inequality, is to make everyone equally POOR, except of course, the government, and it cronies. But they (the government) will eventally be reduced to poverty also, by the corrupt incentives, of a centrally planned economy.
When a person earns money in the free-market, he does so, by providing a good or a service, supperior to the competing goods and services, according to his customer. This “earned money” is now his property, and can be spent, saved, invested, or donated, according to his priorities. By earning money, in the free market, he has raised the level of GNP, and society benefits by his wealth production.
If he chooses to donate money to the less-fortunate, the donator, recieves the benefits of magnanamy. The recipient(s) know the gift was given freely, and that future gifts are not certain. They know that, if they too, can be productive, that they will recieve independence, and the ability to help those, less able to compete.
When the government intrudes on this process, the govenment is now “taking by force” property from the earners, and presenting it to the “entitled”. Both sides are now less incentivised, to either earn more money, or to become less dependent. The end of this scenerio can be soon, or it can be forced into the future (for the children to enjoy), but it can not be prevented.
This system can not prevail, and ALWAYS ends in a collapse, where everyone is poor, and angry, and the vacuum is filled with “angry, nasty” leaders.
It is human nature. There has never been an example of socialism, that has had long-term economic growth. And there never will be. It violates the basic incentives for work.

Krugman talks of “Everyday Externalities”. People should not make the mistake of thinking that all externalities are negative as some are positive. Aside from other things Co2 is also a bi-product of industrial activity and this bi-product is helping to green the planet. So there.

henry@dirkh & others
the countries that I mentioned in my earlier post all have the highest per capita income and the lowest gini factor, Your reference. does not disprove that. So socialism is good and social programs work. Canada versus USA is another good example. (I will l bet that Canada’s per capita income is bigger than that the USA). Obviously I have been doing some thinking about why this is so. The reason I came up with is simple.. Here in South Africa that has a high gini factor, I can see this very clearly. The rich people already have everything they need, so if they become richer they will not consume that much more. On the other hand, if the lower classes and total “have-nots” get more money in their hands they want fridges, washing machines and other basic commodities, etc. and so the whole economy gets working and everyone profits…. it is that simple….
Even in ancient Israel they had a social benefit: every 50 years all land would go back to the original owners and slaves were set free.
BTW, I subsequently found out that 50 years is about 50% of a 100 years weather cycle that the ancients knew about which has at its basis the noted 88 year Gleissberg solar/weather cycle.
http://blogs.24.com/henryp/2012/10/02/best-sine-wave-fit-for-the-drop-in-global-maximum-temperatures/

@E.M.Smith
I think you are giving too much credit, for formulating a “grand strategy” of eventual success for collective policies. This seems more like, imperial hubris , that allows ivy-league theorists, to think they can improve on the efficiencies of the market, through skillful manipulation, of the participants, and the underlaying incentives.
The very traits that you decribe for a politician “Sleezy schmoozing skills, lying with grace and ease, etc..”, are only effective if done, when the media is corrupt and the public is ignorant, or the voting public is tolerant of these traits.
The internet is removing the stranglehold, the media has on “political message”. The wealth that has been distroyed over the past 4 years, is a festering sore, that a small majority of voters, are willing to live with, as long as they think the politicians are trying to impove the economy. The modern maximum for maintaing a secret is 3 individuals. And only if they all stand to lose equally from the exposure of that secret.

HenryP says:
March 16, 2013 at 11:57 am
“So socialism is good and social programs work. Canada versus USA is another good example. (I will l bet that Canada’s per capita income is bigger than that the USA). ”
In this case, you are right – but do you really want to make the case that Harper is a greater socialist than Trudeau? 🙂

Russ R. says:
March 16, 2013 at 12:43 pm
“I think you are giving too much credit, for formulating a “grand strategy”
[…]
The modern maximum for maintaing a secret is 3 individuals. And only if they all stand to lose equally from the exposure of that secret.”
What gives you the idea that it is a secret?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabians

John A says (March 16, 2013 at 4:51 am): “Paul Krugman does not speak for liberals – he speaks only for himself.”
Paul Krugman speaks for enough people to earn a pretty good living.

RACookPE1978 says (March 16, 2013 at 12:16 pm)
But why are we NOT seeing 10% and 15% inflation today, or in the past two or three years.
I know that much inflaton can be “hidden” by accounting practices and by “changing the rules” about how prices are calculated and what is offset.
——-
Try the shops, or better still, see http://www.shadowstats.com/
As for the arguments over political economy. has no-one heard the old joke: “Capitalism is the exploitation of man by man; communism is the reverse”?

@E.M.Smith says:
March 16, 2013 at 10:57 am
Kudos for several excellent posts which I fear, but hope will not, may be prophetic for the future of the U.S.

Wish I had the conscience of a liberal; I could use 50 Gs right now for doing nothing more than writing a propoganda piece for a crooked company.

The arrogance of these people who seem to think we worms (human beings) are so powerful that we can control the planet’s climate. If you look up into the sky you see an enormous fire ball which is, something like, 1.4 MILLION times bigger than our planet which must have some effect !! You cannot see us from space, you cannot even see us from an aeroplane – we are so small, yes a lot but still tiny. Keep telling the truth !

Sorry, that last sentence should have been:
I am just saying. If people take care of each other, God will take care of us.
Cheers.
Henry