I had no more than published the QOTW yesterday, and this one popped up. I’m of the opinion now that NYT economist and columnist Paul Krugman has gone insane, because nobody with any intact cognition would make a statement like this. Even Al Gore hasn’t gone this far, this is in nucking futz territory.
The scene is set on HBO’s Real Time Friday. Krugman is a guest, pitching his book, but at the same time pitching an idea that he’s totally serious about. It involves aliens and scientists and lies to the public on a grand scale, plus a shout out to California’s high-speed rail boondoggle. Here’s the transcript, brace yourself.
PAUL KRUGMAN, NEW YORK TIMES: This is hard to get people to do, much better, obviously, to build bridges and roads and healthcare clinics and schools. But my proposed, I actually have a serious proposal which is that we have to get a bunch of scientists to tell us that we’re facing a threatened alien invasion, and in order to be prepared for that alien invasion we have to do things like build high-speed rail. And the, once we’ve recovered, we can say, “Look, there were no aliens.”
But look, I mean, whatever it takes because right now we need somebody to spend, and that somebody has to be the U.S. government.
Watch the video here: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/05/26/krugman-scientists-should-falsely-predict-alien-invasion-so-governmen#ixzz1w5zk6aAO
UPDATE: one commenter thinks he’s being sarcastic or tongue in cheek, here’s my response –
If he had left the comment at that, I’d agree with you, but he added this without saying “I’m joking” or “That’s silly but…”
But look, I mean, whatever it takes because right now we need somebody to spend, and that somebody has to be the U.S. government.
He’s a big boy, he knows the ropes of these interviews, and he didn’t insert an appropriate caveat. – Anthony
UPDATE2: This is now a theme with Krugman. Obviously he stands by his words or he would not have repeated it. See 1:01 in this Aug 14th, 2011 video.
===========================================================
The signs have been there. In Feb 2011, Krugman pulled another whopper. Paul Krugman’s opinion in the NY Times blamed climate change for the unrest in Egypt.
Dr. Ryan N. Maue wrote then:
Based upon this quote from Krugman:
But the evidence tells a different, much more ominous story. While several factors have contributed to soaring food prices, what really stands out is the extent to which severe weather events have disrupted agricultural production. And these severe weather events are exactly the kind of thing we’d expect to see as rising concentrations of greenhouse gases change our climate — which means that the current food price surge may be just the beginning.
There is no other way to interpret this than “I told you so” from Krugman directly linking climate change and the disparate weather events of the past year or two to food prices and the crises in the Arab world. To various commenters who are defending Krugman religiously, do you doubt that Krugman is linking the events implicitly or explicitly? Remind you, this is the same Nobel prize winner that less than a few hours after Congresswoman Giffords was shot blamed conservatives for the so-called “Climate of Hate“. How does he have ANY credibility at all — especially with anything related to physical sciences?
==============================================================
Indeed.
h/t to WUWT reader “good business”
Related articles
- Krugman: scientists should falsely predict alien invasion (motls.blogspot.com)
- Krugman: Scientists Should Falsely Predict Alien Invasion So Government Will Spend More Money (newsbusters.org)
- Krugman : Scientists Should Lie – To Force The Country Further Into Debt (stevengoddard.wordpress.com)
DirkH says:
May 27, 2012 at 2:31 pm
“Could one of the Keynesian commenters tell me about the position Krugman has about this?”
As I pointed out earlier Krugman is not a Keynesian he is a neo-classicist stealing some of Keynes’s ideas.
I am not defending Krugman 😮
Krugman is basically endorsing the same policy toward government spending that the left argues Bush 43 and co. embraced regarding Iraqi WMDs.
Tell any story that furthers your agenda.
Europe isn’t going down the drain because they quit spending. They quit spending because there is no more capital to spend.
No more MONEY to spend? This is true for the Euro countries as they have given up their own currency. An act of foolishness that is likely without equal in the last 100 years.
But not true for non Euro countries.
DirkH says:
“… ‘Keynesianism’ has a fixed meaning now, whether you like it or not.”
Dirk is correct, unfortunately. J.M. Keynes was much more complex than is suggested by the throwaway line, “Keynesianism.” And his policies were always followed — half way. His stimulus spending has been embraced by every kind of politician, but when it came to spending cuts and saving for a rainy day, well, we’re still waiting to see that.☹
DirkH says:
May 27, 2012 at 2:39 pm
“Hayek said the same thing in an interview; he knew Keynes. So we don’t know what Keynes would propose today. But “Keynesianism” has a fixed meaning now, whether you like it or not.”
True enough but the fixed meaning is what the neo-classicists interpret Keynes as saying, however if you read his works you see it diverges from the modern interpretation.
The people who currently teach economics in all universities are neo-classicists so everything is seen through the neo-classical view point.
byz says:
May 27, 2012 at 2:53 pm
“As I pointed out earlier Krugman is not a Keynesian he is a neo-classicist stealing some of Keynes’s ideas.
I am not defending Krugman :o”
This deflection tactic has a name:
http://www.logicalfallacies.info/presumption/no-true-scotsman/
Again: Could one of the Keynesians on board tell me what Krugman has to say about the Afghanistan conflict and the prison population? Bait, bait!
Many “pheasant pluckers” turn out to be “nucking futz”. “ducking the fog” explains it all.
The problem with Krugman’s proposal (ok there’s a whole bunch of problems — this is only my favourite): “Scientists” who scream that the sky is falling and therefore a whole bunch of new government policy must be implemented, stat! … no longer have any credibility. Not even among “true believers”. He’s never read the story about the Boy Who Cried Wolf, apparently.
In a certain sense Krugman’s plan has ALREADY been implemented (substitute global meltdown for alien invasion). And look at the financial mess it has caused.
Europe is in trouble as no-one enforced the rules of being in a single currency and why is this…
Because Germany broke them first!!
Good news.
The AGW lie doesn’t work anymore. They need a new one.
Aliens sound reasonable too.
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” — H.L. Mencken
‘Nuff said.
Sorry for the fropanities and eph-words ▲
Maus,
Here’s another Mencken gem:
“The government consists of a gang of men exactly like you and me. They have, taking one with another, no special talent for the business of government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office. Their principal device to that end is to search out groups who pant and pine for something they can’t get and to promise to give it to them. Nine times out of ten that promise is worth nothing. The tenth time it is made good by looting A to satisfy B. In other words, government is a broker in pillage, and every election is sort of an advance auction sale of stolen goods.”
Good, no? Keep it in mind during the next election cycle.☺
As with all rabid leftists, the end justifies the means. What they fail to grasp is that a lot of us don’t like their ‘end’ to begin with so there’s absolutely no reason to ‘justify’ it to us.
DirkH
stop trolling!!
I am being straight over this and not diverting, I have read his works and Keynes’s works and they do not agree.
As to the prison population they are like having someone unemployed, it would be better to have them doing useful work, than being locked in their cells 23 hours a day.
Afganistan is down to you not spending money on intelligence and defence in the first place, the US had been warned about those involved in 9/11 and didn’t act on it, you then paid the price. Just like the powers before WWII were warned about Germany and failed to act. This has nothing to do with economics just incompetence. I flew around the US in 2004 and was shocked how awful security was around internal flights, anyone could have put anything on a plane.
I don’t know if this is a repeat, but Krugman did this last year.
http://mises.org/daily/5559/Keynes-and-Space-Aliens
Come on people let’s turn on our sense of humor again.
Krugman believes in massive government spending to kick-start the economy.
He makes an analogy with the Depression and WWII. And he is trying to be funny: “Let’s say aliens are invading and we need high-speed rail to combat them. That way government spending will start up the economy again.”
I am a huge fan of this blog and I rarely agree with Paul Krugman, but putting a humorless spin on this and acting really indignant, makes you look like a humorless fool.
Should he repeat this joke a hundred times more; it still doesn’t make it a serious proposal.
———————
Now here is some serious news about aliens:
Ridley Scott is preparing a prequel to Alien !!!
http://www.alienprequelnews.com/2011/12/ridley-scott-alien-felt-epic-but-this.html
Mike M says:
May 27, 2012 at 3:13 pm
As with all rabid leftists, the end justifies the means. What they fail to grasp is that a lot of us don’t like their ‘end’ to begin with so there’s absolutely no reason to ‘justify’ it to us.
“Anything is acceptable if it leads to a successful result.” First use in the United States: “Diary” (1657) by Michael Wigglesworth (1631-1705), American clergyman and poet.
🙂
Based upon this quote from Krugman:
But the evidence tells a different, much more ominous story. While several factors have contributed to soaring food prices, what really stands out is the extent to which severe weather events have disrupted agricultural production. And these severe weather events are exactly the kind of thing we’d expect to see as rising concentrations of greenhouse gases change our climate — which means that the current food price surge may be just the beginning.
==================================
Rising food prices in the USA and as a net exporter in the world market could be tied to the US govt. desire / mandate to burn agricultural crops. Simple concept is to chose a favorite for burning (corn). Government mandate to burn and subsidize its burning. Other agricultural resources such as wheat, oats, etc. are reduced in acreage planted to meet burning mandates. Food sources using these agricultural grains as feedstock (beef, poultry, eggs, etc) skyrocket. Food sources using agricultural grains of all sources (bread, cereal, etc) skyrocket. Vehicles utilized for burning these crops (corn) use more fossil fuel through conversion and reduced fuel mileage. It has been a very expensive and failed model. Who could have believed it possible?
Toss in “cash for clunkers” to remove affordable used vehicles from the market by those needing affordable transportation while at the same time crushing the markets (auto parts and repair shops) that kept them running and the independent dealers that sold them.
Toss in western energy policies and well ….. you get the idea.
There are many such economists in the nucking futz camp. The ones who bought into these BS ideas are also nucking futz. Who could have possibly believed it possible?
byz: “The people who currently teach economics in all universities are neo-classicists so everything is seen through the neo-classical view point.”
Well that all depends on how much of a stickler we want to be. For certainly numerous people state ‘Keyesian’ when they mean ‘neo-Keynesian’. And if we wish to play the pedant then is is surely wrong to mix and match the two.
That said, if we wish to play pedant, ‘neoclassical’ refers to micro-economics while Krugman is speaking of macro. In which case your entire line of argument is simply wrong. But then, of course, many folks say ‘neoclassical’ when they mean ‘neoclassical synthesis’. The latter being quite obviously what you intend given the context of your above quote. But then the neoclassical synthesis is neoclassical for micro and neo-Keyensian for the maco. In which case you’re still wrong.
All told though it’s nice to see that someone has any interest or knowledge in what Keynes held and what other folks did to his corpse.
“But look, I mean, whatever it takes because right now we need somebody to spend, and that somebody has to be the U.S. government.”
============================
Where does one even start, when a statement such as this is uttered.
A Noam Chomsky wannabe, obviously.
In true “crazy blue protesting lady” style.
As if there are no real problems that we could mobilize people to invest in solving…..Paul, have you ever heard of malaria? HIV? Illiteracy? Women’s oppression? Poverty (particularly as it could be defined as lack of access to technology)? Hell, even obesity?
While I think Krugman is right that people will be more inclined to invest in defense against invasion than any of those causes, it’s still pretty ridiculous to suggest we need to make up a major problem, as if there aren’t real ones.
It’s an interesting controversy this one. I may be wrong, but didn’t the US build it’s way out of the 1920s recession by constructing the interstate.
The problem is that Obama seems to want to increase borrowing to cover debt payments without any recovery plan. Not that high speed rail is necessarily the answer, but some sort of plan to get folks back to work and build for the future economy is needed. If you don’t want to spend more money, just reduce grants on loony global warming research.