PAUL KRUGMAN VS RON PAUL: WHO’S RIGHT?

I continue to be surprised at the low quality of thinking as exhibited by Paul Krugman. In his debate with Ron Paul (dubbed PAUL VS PAUL by Bloomberg), Krugman attempts to discredit the Texas congressman by saying he’s living in the world as it was 150 years ago, what with Ron Paul’s support of a gold standard and anti-central bank stance.

Ron Paul, turning the tables on Krugman, points out that the Fed-induced inflation is the same as destructive policies done in ancient times. The idea that our system is so “modern” as to be dependent on currency devaluation is thus shown to be hollow.

But Krugman supposedly doesn’t believe that Roman times are knowable at all. To him, such ancient references are mere “showing off” of “esoteric knowledge.” (As if it wasn’t Krugman who first tried to brush off his opponents’ ideas as primitive!)

“I BELIEVE IN MARKETS” MY ASS

Krugman prefers to focus on the 20^th century and beyond. Even here, Krugman makes no decent arguments. He just laughs at what Ron Paul says so as to appear smarter.

The fact that prosperity came after World War II is taken by Krugman to be proof of central bank effectiveness. His poor methodology, of simply accepting interpretations that conform to his prejudices, does not consider that such prosperity happened in spite of monetary interventions.

What of the drop in government spending and increased resources for non-war purposes, after WWII? No, that had nothing to do with the recovery, Krugman believes (he also believes central banks complement markets). The Fed did it!

As for the cause of the Great Depression, he’d like to blame the market’s ‘underconsumption.’ As anyone who studies Austrian economics knows, Keynes’ ‘circular flow’ model has no basis in reality at all. It is not demand and spending that make for output.

THE STATE PERPETUATES DEBILITATION OF MINDS

It is at this point that I have to stop myself from correcting all the misconceptions, misinterpretations, and sheer stupidity of Krugman and others in the economics academe. They are simply psychologically incapable of understanding.

Alas, it must hurt to realize that thousands of dollars and hours had been wasted on getting an MA, a PhD, and a reputation as an ‘expert.’ Free-market economics and ‘contrarian’ views are brushed aside as just another cataloguing of people (“There’s the Nader guy, there’s the Marx guy, there’s the free-market-Ron-Paul guy, etc…”).

Add to that all the pats on the back by the charismatic political elite, and the awards/bribes associated with advocating statist policy; how could you let go of your views when all this comes your way?

WHO’S TO JUDGE?

These people will themselves to stupidity, and drag society down to a significant degree. What am I to do about it? Present logic to them, so as to turn the tide? Forget it.

No. In the first place, I do not leave it to them to be judge. Having failed to convince, I leave my case for a more intelligent public to discover. And that should be satisfying enough for me.

Of course, we have the Depression intensifying in the coming years, the effects of which will be felt worldwide. But this won’t change the minds of willing morons, who’ll just come up with some positivist justification (e.g. “interest rates should have been at -10%”).