Thanks to my old pal poet Bob Berner for hipping me to this much needed comic, but pointed, diversion:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
just another ex-jazz-musician/proto-rapper/Jersey-Irish-poet-actor/print-junkie/film-raptor/beat-hipster-"white Negro"-rhapsodizer/ex-hippie-punk-'60s-radical-organizer's take on all things cultural, political, spiritual & aggrandizing
16 comments:
This is fantastic!!!
High-Larry-Us
~ Willy
Hi Mike,
Your buddy Krugman of course thinks Obama should have spent more money. Thought you might appreciate thoughts from across the pond on Nobel Paul. It seems that he is not universially hailed for his insight. I must admit I do not agree with the shut up sentiments, just his assesment of Krugman.
Jeremy Warner, assistant editor of The Daily Telegraph, is one of Britain's leading business and economics commentators. Will someone please shut Krugman up
By Jeremy Warner Economics Last updated: October 23rd, 2010
342 Comments Comment on this article
He's at it again: US economist Paul Krugman (Photo: EPA)
Sorry, a bit late on this one, but I see old Kruggers, Nobel prize winner and New York Times columnist, is at it again. Not content to lecture his own country’s administration about how they are not spending enough, Professor Krugman lambasts Britain’s coalition government in his latest column for its deficit reduction plan, which he reckons will condemn the UK to a depression
Oh jeez, what was I thinking believing a Nobel Laureate who has been proven right more than any other economist in recent years except for those other Nobel laureates who agree with him (including the latest) when all along I should have been only listening to "commentators" who criticize him and are favored by other rightwing commentators who have proven themselves so correct about war and economics and all the great things they created when they were in charge of our country for eight years!
Mike,
I can not think of one thing that he has been right about since his Nobel thesis. Certainly, the last two years have been a disater for Obamanomics, America and Krugman's credibility. Maybe you can enlighten us on some of Krugman's recent successes.
Like evidence ever convinced a rightwinger of anything. It's all in the public record, as are the failures of the rightwing in this country to produce anything that benefits anyone other than the wealthiest few. The rest of us only lose while the right shifts the focus from their failures to lies about the failures of others. The only failure for the rest of us was in not overwhelmingly rejecting Bush/Cheney at the voting booth when we had the chance(s). I will now go back to putting my time and energy into things and people worth the effort.
Mike,
Your response on recent examples of Krugman's brilliance met my expectations. I will leave the harsh tone to liberals.
Enough of us voted against Bush/Cheney in 2000 that they never should have assumed office. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court decided against us. By the time the 2004 election rolled around, the professional propagandists hired by the Republican Party, along with allies in the Murdoch press, were able to hoodwink the electorate into giving the Busheviks a second term despite a two-front war no citizen voted for and a tanked economy that still isn't fixed, whether you're a Keynesian/Kugmanite or a Milton Friedman/IMF/World Bank shock therapist. The last reality is that "austerity" always means working people will be forced to make do with less, while fat cats continue to drive their Rovers in Malibu, where the snow's always waist-deep from November to April, eh?
Shem The Penman
In answer to Jim's commentary on Krugman, I suggest he look at "The Class War At Home" by Bill Quigley, a professor of law at Loyola University, New Orleans. This essay has lots of statistics from the US Census Bureau, the Labor Department, and other reliable sources, all of which point to the undeniable disparity of wealth and means in this country between the Dives of Wall St. and K St. and the Lazaruses of Main St. Quigley's essay can be found at CounterPunch.org for 10-25-10.
Shem The Penman
Shem, Maybe you can summarize Mr. Quigley's thoughts.
I could "summarize Mr. Quigley's thoughts," but I won't do it for the simple reason that you could then claim I misquoted him or diddled his numbers or made-up the whole thing. I won't let you wriggle out of it that way. Y O U have to go to CounterPunch and read Quigley's essay. If you don't, what can we conclude but that you are not interested in the truth?
Shem The Penman
Quigley described a condition of unequal outcomes. The US Constitution guarantees equal opportunity before the law. It does not guarantee equal outcomes. Attempts to guarantee equal outcomes have been spectacuarlly unsuccessful starting in America with the Mayflower Compact and in Europe with the French Revolution.
Later attempts in Europe and Asia resulted in massive oppression and disastorous economic outcomes. China is transitioning from Communism to their own form of free enterprise. Obama and the Democrats seem to want to take us to European socialism and Chinese communism at precisely the time that Europe/China are transitioning awary from it since it failed. Mr. Quigley does not seem to be concerned with the historical failure of socialism.
Quigley:
"The rich talk about the rise of socialism to divert attention from the fact that they are devouring the basics of the poor and everyone else. Many of those crying socialism the loudest are doing it to enrich or empower themselves. They are right about one thing – there is a class war going on in the US. The rich are winning their class war, and it is time for everyone else to fight back for economic justice."
Equal opportunity does not exist in reality. Period.
Jim's posting ends by quoting the last paragraph of Quigley's article, but he ignores the statistics Quigley cites. And Jim begins with a conclusion about what, as he sees it, Quigley's article does, then proceeds to quote two paragraphs of twaddle from one of his own previous postings.The "equal opportunity" Jim is so fond of prating about is a chimera, a fiction dangling like the proverbial carrot in front of the shiftless masses. If the lazy bums don't grab the carrot of opportunity, they have no one to blame but themselves, of course. But then,we still have to ask, "How long is the string? And who is holding the stick?"
Quigley's article answers both those questions.
Shem The Penman
The Tea Party and the whole lot are blaming our current state of affairs on the disaster that President Obama inherited from the previous administration. Had that continued, we'd be so worse off in so many ways. It was necessary for Obama to do what he's done in order to avert complete ruin of our society and nation. It takes time to turn things around. And, as Michael has oft pointed out with specific, irrefutable examples, things have turned or have started turning around. Unfortunately, too many don't like that Obama is of mixed lineage racially. They won't admit it, but it's the truth. Or that he has a name that isn't WASPish. If his name was Bernard Oberon Jr., if he had thin lips, straight hair, lighter skin and spoke with a Texas drawl and was inarticulate, he could have done exactly the same things he's done and all the current detractors would be standing behind him. It's hard for folks to really man up and admit the truth, but deep inside, we all know it.
Robert,
How does the high number of black Republican Tea Partier candidates comport with your thesis?
Post a Comment