There is no free in liberty.


Sunday, July 31, 2011

Paul Krugman - Blind to Patterns and Blinded by Keynes...


We all know Will Smith. Successful. When asked about the source of his success one of his answers has been his reliance on being able to recognize patterns of success and jumping on. For instance: before Men in Black Smith recognized that up to that point over half of the top 10 grossing movies had, as he put it, "creatures". When given the opportunity to star in Men in Black he relied on his recognition of a pattern of success when accepting the role.

Will Smith:

No. I do not believe in getting trapped in a pattern when you recognize the pattern. The child-actor are obvious. I am kind of a student of the patterns of the universe. When my partner, James Lassiter, and I came to Hollywood, I said, "I want to be the biggest movie star in the world." We observed that of the top ten movies of all time, ten were special effects or animation. Nine were special effects or animation with creatures. Eight were special effects or animation with creatures and a love story. So we made Independence Day. When you see the , you just try to put yourself in the position to get lucky.

Not all of us are as proficient as Will Smith in recognizing patterns to jump on to or off of, though.

Krugman had this to say via Huffpost:

"From the perspective of a rational person -- in other words a progressive -- we shouldn't be talking about spending cuts at all now," Krugman said during a roundtable discussion on ABCNews' This Week With Christiane Amanpour. "We have 9 percent unemployment. These spending cuts are going to worsen unemployment. It's even going to hold the long-run fiscal picture because we have a situation where more and more people are becoming permanent long-term unemployed."

When is a Keynesian wrong? The answer is never, as they are the economic back beat to Climate change.

Apparently there are no conditions under which either theory is falsifiable even when patterns of failure emerge...

Simple questions:

::Why is it that the recession in the early 30's became the great depression after Keynesian expansion?

::Why was there a recession in 37 (until recently a recession second only to the Great Depression in severity) after years of enacting Keynesian solutions?

::If WWII was an example of Keynesian success why was it immediately followed by the recession of 45 at the war's end?

::If Japan executed one of the greatest Keynesian experiments in modern history then why do they languish in a perma-recession.

::If the US invested it's own round of Keynesian based solutions beginning in 2008, then why does the US seem to be entering it's own perma-recession in the same way that it did during the great depression and in the same way that Japan has?

::If Keynesian Theory is intended to "kick-start" an economy out of recession, why was there a greater rate of growth after recessions prior to the use of Keynesian solutions?

Keynesian solutions have racked up an impressive pattern of extending recessions. Only the most credentialed among us can pass off the stupidity of arguing otherwise otherwise as intellectual thought.


No comments:

Post a Comment