Mga app ng Google
Pangunahing menu

Post a Comment On: Steve Sailer: iSteve

"How Krugman got it wrong"

29 Comments -

1 – 29 of 29
Anonymous Anonymous said...

...this is the 21st Century, and the critical problems we face are the ones that economists have tried hard to ignore... immigration is never mentioned...

Nor is this ever mentioned:

The 2009 Statistical Abstract of the United States
Section 1, Population
census.gov

Table 8. Resident Population by Race, Hispanic Origin, and Age: 2000 and 2007

Not Hispanic, White Alone, 2007
[in thousands]

50-54 years old: 15,363
45-49 years old: 16,109
40-44 years old: 14,597
35-39 years old: 13,272
30-34 years old: 11,425
25-29 years old: 12,497
20-24 years old: 12,930
15-19 years old: 13,006
10-14 years old: 11,866
05-09 years old: 11,255
00-04 years old: 11,175

9/6/09, 11:47 PM

Blogger Glaivester said...

May I suggest my rebuttal to Krugman's 1998 piece?

9/7/09, 12:03 AM

Anonymous Rimowicz said...

yeah yeah we get it. you hate blacks n' mexicans. blah blah blah. what's new.

9/7/09, 12:05 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Steve, I recently found your blog and wish to thank you for addressing the housing bubble with respect to illegals. I don't know if you have seen this, but three years ago the Denver Post reported that:

One government source estimates 20,000 illegal immigrants hold FHA-insured loans in metro Denver alone.

Denver Post

This is just for Denver! I wonder what this figure is in places like California.

9/7/09, 12:06 AM

Anonymous Cleveland Steamer said...

It's as if Krugman feels guilty and wants to get this big, smelly, steaming, nasty, mess off of his chest. But he's just too cowardly to accept personal responsibility.

9/7/09, 12:27 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

yeah yeah yeah we get that Rimowicz can't actually make an argument. So what else is new.

...Steve, you are really a treasure. At some point in the not too distant future we'll look at Krugman's prize like we look at Duranty's. Another guy in the NYT, another liar.

9/7/09, 12:57 AM

Blogger Andrew said...

8 posts in one day! Slow down Steve! Spread it out a little...

9/7/09, 1:01 AM

Blogger Whiskey said...

I've mentioned it a LOT Anonymous. In fact, in my blog I devote considerable space to covering the lack of young people. You might check out for example my posts on the failure of Indy 103.1 FM, or why Rock died, or my post on the Brandon Tartikoff Strategy at NBC failing (because it's not the 1980's any more).

BUT ... the argument over inflationary/deflationary pressures is as old as Andrew Jackson vs. Bank of the United States, or William Jennings Bryan and the Free Silver movement.

What is interesting is who switched positions. In the old, pre-1968 America, it was Westerners who wanted inflation to wash away debts, and Eastern bankers who wanted low inflation. Now, the middle class is SCREWED by inflation and the Western Populists don't want inflation. Meanwhile, East Coast I-bankers and elites want inflation, to wash away their debts.

/I am also Testing99

9/7/09, 1:34 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rimowicz sez
yeah yeah we get it. you hate blacks n' mexicans. blah blah blah. what's new.


Mmm, this wouldn't be Krugman himself, would it? Wouldn't surprise me if these NYT types resort to this low level of discourse when things don't suit them. It's not without historical precedence either.

9/7/09, 1:35 AM

Anonymous tommy said...

yeah yeah we get it. you hate blacks n' mexicans. blah blah blah. what's new.

Now if only the Rimowiczes and Krugmans of the world would get it, then we might not be in the mess we are in today.

9/7/09, 1:45 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

More specifically, the spending of a population is based on its wealth. In the long run, its wealth is mostly a function of its human capital (i.e., the population's ability to earn money).





Reminds me of that "what is wealth" argument we had here a month ago. It's hard to escape the conclusion that the people running the show don't know, and never even wonder.

9/7/09, 1:46 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Economics still enforces the Axiom of Equality--everyone's the same but for education. Thus, the Mexican immigrants are just like the Germans Benjamin Franklin ridiculed, or the Irish. To assert otherwise is 'beyond the pale'.

9/7/09, 5:01 AM

Anonymous Henry Canaday said...

Krugman’s omission of government pressures on housing finance markets and incompetent immigration enforcement are intellectually significant because a strong implication of his generally true argument that financial markets are imperfect is that government must play a stronger role in regulating financial markets. And once we allow government to play this stronger role, the question is, what will government do with its enhanced powers? If government manipulation of housing finance ignited this particular crash, then we may have simply expanded government powers to do mischief, creating more opportunity for future disasters or slow stagnation.

This would have a precedent. ‘Cartoon Keynesianism’ fell into disrepute in the 1970s not chiefly due to its intellectual weaknesses, which were always real but had been ignored for quite a while, but because the powers this simplified model gave politicians were systematically abused, in the form of chronic spending indiscipline, excess monetary creation and weakening or distorting necessary incentives.

I think that is chiefly what the most reasonable 'freshwater' economists are worried about, and very rightly so.

9/7/09, 6:07 AM

Blogger Robert said...

So Rimowicz is saying that no one would ever make the argument that blacks and Hispanics got too many easy-money mortgages unless he was prejudiced against blacks and Hispanics. No other argument that might support such a position is allowed to be considered. Why? Blankout, as Miss Rand would say.

9/7/09, 6:15 AM

Anonymous Hot Karl said...

It's as if Krugman feels guilty and wants to get this big, smelly, steaming, nasty, mess off of his chest. But he's just too cowardly to accept personal responsibility.

definitely agree.

9/7/09, 7:20 AM

Anonymous Jeff said...

I have studied economics, as a man and as a boy, for over 40 years.

My impression of Krugman and the other Keynesian economists at U.S. universities is that they are nothing more than apologists for big government.

That's all they are: whores who always support more government spending. As such they play a useful role for the masters of the corporatist thief state.

A fun thing to do, if you meet up with one of these creeps, is to ask them how much government spending is enough: A trillion trillion? A googol? Infinity minus one? [h/t Thomas Woods]

They will never give you an answer to how much government spending is enough, because they are programmed to always answer "More!"
And, of course, big government debt is "not a problem."

9/7/09, 8:36 AM

Anonymous Mr. Anon said...

"Anonymous said...

At some point in the not too distant future we'll look at Krugman's prize like we look at Duranty's. Another guy in the NYT, another liar."

Every "Nobel" Prize in Economics is a lie, given that such a prize was never in Alfred Nobel's original bequest. The people who award this ersatz "Nobel Prize" can no more legitimately do so than can I award someone a Victoria Cross.

9/7/09, 10:51 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Something else that economists never mention:


List of Nobel laureates by country
en.wikipedia.org

List of countries and territories by fertility rate
en.wikipedia.org


Note that no effort has been made to weed out the effect of Muslim immigration and fecundity on the following statistics [which, as a result, probably grossly overstate the fertility rates in question].

Also, note that a total fertility rate of 2.10 is widely believed to be necessary to maintain a stable population.


France
57 Nobel Laureates
UN TFR 2005-2010: 1.89
CIA TFR 2008: 1.98 ["Metropolitan France"]

Norway
11 Nobel Laureates
UN TFR 2005-2010: 1.85
CIA TFR 2008: 1.78

United Kingdom
113 Nobel Laureates
UN TFR 2005-2010: 1.82
CIA TFR 2008: 1.66

Denmark
13 Nobel Laureates
UN TFR 2005-2010: 1.80
CIA TFR 2008: 1.74

Sweden
28 Nobel Laureates
UN TFR 2005-2010: 1.80
CIA TFR 2008: 1.67

Netherlands
18 Nobel Laureates
UN TFR 2005-2010: 1.72
CIA TFR 2008: 1.66

Belgium
11 Nobel Laureates
UN TFR 2005-2010: 1.65
CIA TFR 2008: 1.65

Canada
17 Nobel Laureates
UN TFR 2005-2010: 1.53
CIA TFR 2008: 1.57

Switzerland
25 Nobel Laureates
UN TFR 2005-2010: 1.42
CIA TFR 2008: 1.44

Austria
19 Nobel Laureates
UN TFR 2005-2010: 1.42
CIA TFR 2008: 1.38

Germany
102 Nobel Laureates
UN TFR 2005-2010: 1.36
CIA TFR 2008: 1.41

Russia
23 Nobel Laureates
UN TFR 2005-2010: 1.34
CIA TFR 2008: 1.40

Italy
20 Nobel Laureates
UN TFR 2005-2010: 1.38
CIA TFR 2008: 1.30

Hungary
9 Nobel Laureates
UN TFR 2005-2010: 1.28
CIA TFR 2008: 1.34

Poland
12 Nobel Laureates
UN TFR 2005-2010: 1.23
CIA TFR 2008: 1.27

Japan
16 Nobel Laureates
UN TFR 2005-2010: 1.27
CIA TFR 2008: 1.22

Taiwan
1 Nobel Laureate
UN TFR 2005-2010: N/A
CIA TFR 2008: 1.13

9/7/09, 1:20 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

And yet another thing that economists never mention:


RACE MIXTURE IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE
by Tenney Frank
American Historical Review
July 1916, vol. 21, no. 4: 689–708
theoccidentalquarterly.com

...By combining epigraphical and literary references, a fairly full history of the noble families can be procured, and this reveals a startling inability of such families to perpetuate themselves. We know, for instance, in Caesar’s day of forty-fi ve patricians, only one of whom is represented by posterity when Hadrian came to power. The Aemilii, Fabii, Claudii, Manlii, Valerii, and all the rest, with the exception of the Cornelii, have disappeared. Augustus and Claudius raised twenty-five families to the patriciate, and all but six of them disappear before Nerva’s reign. Of the families of nearly four hundred senators recorded in 65 A.D. under Nero, all trace of a half is lost by Nerva’s day, a generation later. And the records are so full that these statistics may be assumed to represent with a fair degree of accuracy the disappearance of the male stock of the families in question. Of course members of the aristocracy were the chief sufferers from the tyranny of the century, but this havoc was not all wrought by delatores and assassins. The voluntary choice of childlessness accounts largely for the unparalleled condition...

9/7/09, 1:25 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Rimowicz said...
yeah yeah we get it. you hate blacks n' mexicans. blah blah blah. what's new."

Do you have anything useful to contribute? Facts to prove Steve wrong, say?
Howls of "Nanananana, you RACIST" don't impress us around here.

9/7/09, 1:31 PM

Anonymous Cincinnati Bowtie said...

Krugman really needs to reverse his position. He's got it all backwards.

9/7/09, 2:04 PM

Blogger Mercer said...

Steve I share your hostility to high immigration and "diversity" dogma but I don't think you can blame them for financial meltdown. Diversity dogma was a factor in the housing bubble but don't I see how it caused worse credit crisis in 70 years. The financial meltdown was caused by Wall Street.

Diversity had nothing to do with the creation of credit default swaps and other derivatives which Buffett accurately called financial weapons of mass destruction. Diversity also did not call for investment banks to leverage their capital at 40 to 1 ratios.

Our immigration policies are flawed but so is our regulation of Wall Street. The financial meltdown was caused by bankers who take very risky bets and are bailed out when their bets are wrong - see Long Term Capital Management for the precedent.

9/7/09, 4:18 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here is an interesting article on migrants, aka illegals, worldwide from the BBC

It points out how the recession has cut the number of Mexicans coming to the US by 40%. It has also taken a toll on remittances being sent home.

However, they are apparently staying put and not going home. The BBC doesn't mention this, but I bet the availability of food stamps, welfare, emergency room care and other freebies is keeping them here.

I wonder how many would self deport if only the government followed the law.

9/8/09, 12:05 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

So, don't debauch the average human capital of your population.

How many hours would you last at Princeton or the NYT after speaking that kind of truth?

9/8/09, 12:30 AM

Anonymous milam command said...

Wow. Someone's been reading some Austrian economics. Nice to see the start of some basic level of understanding, rather than the usual knee-jerk ad-hominem attacks on austro-libertarians you usually read here.

9/8/09, 2:57 AM

Blogger jimbo said...

Once again, Steve, you are being almost willfully obtuse. Krugman is not arguing that the half finished Casinos are "good productive capacity". He specifically says "write them off". But, he asks, why should other "perfectly good productive capacity", in say, Detroit or Portland or Boston, be idled because of bad investments in Las Vegas?

You are usually good at avoid talking about stuff you know nothing about. But in this case, you are taking talking points from your batshit insane Austrian associates, and your normally clearheaded analysis is suffering for it.

9/8/09, 7:09 AM

Blogger Truth said...

"So Rimowicz is saying that no one would ever make the argument that blacks and Hispanics got too many easy-money mortgages unless he was prejudiced against blacks and Hispanics..."

IS that what he was saying?

9/8/09, 7:53 AM

Blogger John Anello said...

I don’t know why sensible people even bother to discuss Paul Krugman as though he is a serious economist. His Nobel Prize work was not exactly groundbreaking and the rest of his work is just flat out wrong. He is little more than a political propagandist providing a façade of intellectual heft to the redistribution goals of the Left.

9/8/09, 9:46 AM

Blogger Reactionary said...

But, he asks, why should other "perfectly good productive capacity", in say, Detroit or Portland or Boston, be idled because of bad investments in Las Vegas?

Because the prior investment in higher stages of production spurred by artificially cheap credit was as unwarranted in Detroit, Portland and Boston as it was in Las Vegas.

Idiot.

9/9/09, 4:48 AM

Comments are moderated, at whim.
You can use some HTML tags, such as <b>, <i>, <a>

Comment moderation has been enabled. All comments must be approved by the blog author.

You will be asked to sign in after submitting your comment.
OpenID LiveJournal WordPress TypePad AOL