*Fake* Krugman: "People on twitter might be joking, but in all seriousness, we would see a bigger boost in spending and hence economic growth if the earthquake had done more damage."


UPDATE BREAKING NEWS ALERT: This yeoman Krugman watcher was fooled, y'all. Dave Weigel writes that Krugman's Google+ account was started by one Carlos Gaterol, who wanted to illustrate through parody "the many misguided beliefs that Paul Krugman holds, defends, and espouses on a daily basis."

Krugman responded this morning to the ruse. From the doctor's NYT blog, which is VERIFIED: 

This is really cute, not. Apparently some people can't find enough things to attack in what I actually say, so they're busy creating fake quotes. And I have enough on my plate without trying to chase all this stuff down.

So if you see me quoted as saying something really stupid or outrageous, and it didn't come from the Times or some other verifiable site, you should probably assume it was a fake.

I regret the error.

Original Post: 

That pearl of wistful wisdom, in case it's not obvious, is in reference to the over-covered earthquake that terrified the entire Eastern Seaboard for a few seconds this afternoon. You can find plenty others like it at the uncensored-for-now Google+ page of Nobel-winning economist Paul Krugman.

NEXT: China Derangement Syndrome

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The wonderful thing about this is, even if it's parody, Krugman is such a clown there's no way to tell whether it's serious. Poe's Law at work, I suppose.

    F***ing broken windows, how do they work?

    1. The point of the broken window parable is to show that one cannot ignore the hidden costs of taking wealth to build the road when totaling up any such "net benefit."

      Yet Libertarians commit the broken window fallacy thinking when they fail to account for the hidden costs of civilization's, ahem, "development." A few examples:

      ? Diseases of Civilization.
      ? Loss of leisure time that people enjoyed in the Original Affluent Society.
      ? Less security, more war.
      ? Humans aren't neurobioligically adapted to mass society, as evidenced by Dunbar's Number.
      ? The anthropogenic Sixth Great Extinction, loss of 200 species per day.

      It's hilarious to watch Libertarian economic assclowns critiquing Liberal economic assclowns on the same stupidity they promote themselves.

      And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? ~verse 38, chapter 3, of The Jefferson Bible

      1. The life of an Indian is a continual holiday. ~Thomas Paine

        Leisure of the masses is of no value to the Elite Capitalists Moochers, thus the privation property central plan rolls on.


          1. Great. Now all we need is the return of shrike.

            1. Why Did the Chicken Cross the Road?

              SOVEREIGN INDIAN: This is the Chickens inherent right as he is indigenous to this land!!!
              MILITANT INDIAN: That chicken should block the road, not cross the road!!!
              GRASSROOT INDIAN: If the darn chickens need to get across the road, let 'em cross the darn road!
              COLONIZED INDIAN: Chiggens should never cross the roads that white men built before the great white father crosses it first. If the white father crosses it, it is good. We must then follow.
              AMERICANIZED INDIAN: We must have roads. We must cross the roads that the white man built for us. We have to be thankful to the white man for this. I don't know why you Indians are always complaining. You embarrass us. Chickens are good for us.
              REPUBLICAN INDIAN: It's true that that white man built those roads for us. We are merely chickens. We will always be chickens until we learn to build those roads ourselves - for profit.
              DEMOCRATIC INDIAN: The chicken crossed the road because he didn't have enough funding.
              TRADITIONAL INDIAN: Those chiggens weren't traditional because they were supposed to be on it - not crossing it!
              INDIAN GRANDPA: I think he was runnin' away from rezidential school.
              URBAN INDIAN: That chicken crossed the road 'cause it was a city, man. You know what I mean?
              NEW AGE INDIAN: It was basically because of Jungian dream therapy, drumming, sweatlodges, my shaman, and long walks on the beach, near my beach house.
              POW WOW INDIAN That chicken must have been heading to a 49!
              EDUCATED INDIAN: I think it has to do with Einstein's theory which basically posits: "Did the chicken really cross the road or did the road move beneath the chicken?"
              REZ INDIAN: Whats a chicken?
              IHS INDIAN: I really don't care why he crossed that road. We still aren't paying for no stinkin hospital bills.
              BIA INDIAN: They crossed it because of CFR 49, Section 11299, gives them the authority to do so, under Department of Interior regulations, in the Executive Branch. They wrote a grant and we funded them. We are very proud of them.
              KFC INDIAN: I'll take a leg, a thigh, with corn and potatoes. Extra Crispy, please.

              And finally....................

              TRIBAL INDIAN COUNCIL: The chicken crossed the road without our approval! Fire his family!!!

          2. He is out-thinking you Austrian Assclowns by a mile, and just took you behind the woodshed and spanked you with your own "broken window" paddle you thought you'd wield on the KrugKlown. Now, quit yer cryin.'

            1. You're actually rooting for Krugman?

              That is not logical.

            2. Doesn't matter if he can out-think us, as long as we can out-smallpox him.

              1. If I say "KrugKlown" do you imagine I'm "rooting" for that economic dolt? Mr. FIFY, you're a couple bricks short of a full load.

                1. You're speaking Krugman's language, White Indian. You're agreeing with him.

                  You tell us.

                  1. "He is out-thinking you Austrian Assclowns by a mile"

                    IOW, since Krugman preaches the Gospel of the Anti-Austrians, you are agreeing with him.

                    Nice try, though.

                    1. KrugKlown and Austrian Assclowns all preach the same basic gospel. Like most true believer sects, both claim the other is going to hell over minor theological differences, but there is little difference in their fundamentalist dogma.

                    2. You're seriously comparing Keynesian socialism and Austrian economic theory.

                      Wow, are you fuckin' stoopid.

                    3. Big differences like Calvinism vs. Arminianism fap fap fap fap fap Only we is Bjorn Again! fap fap fap fap

                    4. ...Armenians make some suck-ass pomegranate wine.

                    5. You'd drink suck-ass wine if you lived in Armenia, too.

                    6. It wouldn't suck if Armenians hadn't plowed fields thousands of years ago.

                    7. Armani suits are cool.

        2. Yeah asshole, there were plenty of Indians that farmed too. So apparently you're just a fucking moron.

          1. Indians who farmed didn't do it long. Agriculture is a disaster, as stupid as breaking windows. As Jared Diamond says in his essay The Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race:

            Another example of paleopathology at work is the study of Indian skeletons from burial mounds in the Illinois and Ohio river valleys. At Dickson Mounds, located near the confluence of the Spoon and Illinois rivers, archaeologists have excavated some 800 skeletons that paint a picture of the health changes that occurred when a hunter-gatherer culture gave way to intensive maize farming around A. D. 1150. Studies by George Armelagos and his colleagues then at the University of Massachusetts show these early farmers paid a price for their new-found livelihood. Compared to the hunter-gatherers who preceded them, the farmers had a nearly 50 per cent increase in enamel defects indicative of malnutrition, a fourfold increase in iron-deficiency anemia (evidenced by a bone condition called porotic hyperostosis), a theefold rise in bone lesions reflecting infectious disease in general, and an increase in degenerative conditions of the spine, probably reflecting a lot of hard physical labor. "Life expectancy at birth in the pre-agricultural community was bout twenty-six years," says Armelagos, "but in the post-agricultural community it was nineteen years. So these episodes of nutritional stress and infectious disease were seriously affecting their ability to survive."

            1. *yawn*

              BTW, you forgot to type "Spock's Raised Eyebrow" in the *NAME box.

            2. For fuck's sake, go read some actual goddamn anthropology and history. Yes, why humans chose to go from the relative health of a hunter gatherer society to the overly grain dependent meals of an agricultural society has vexed many a scholar. They also figure that it was because agriculture was more reliable, and allowed for more people per acre of land.

              Seriously, Rosseau, stop posting on a computer, and go back to your state of nature. I'm sure you could live off the land in the great state of Alaska, or one of our many national parks.

              1. The occupation of the continent is complete. Even the experts, the Indians, can't subsist on the marginal reservations in which they've been imprisoned by the invaders.

                So we all use the tools the prison wardens allow us to have. Just to make you get your pink panties in a wad. LOL

                1. Gimme a break. Your oppressor in the backwoods of some wilderness would be an overworked forest ranger.

                  If Yogi Bear could pull it off, you should be able to. Now, go find a special Boo-Boo to share it with and hike off into the woods to enjoy your ideal.

                  1. If you don't like the State, why don't you move to Antarctica, Mike Laursen? A whole continent awaits!

                    I mean, Gimme a break! KrugKlown has never been there! If penguins can pull it off, you should be able to too. Now, go find a special fat waddler to share it with and sail off into the icy seas to enjoy your ideal.

                    1. I see what you did there, with your keen hunter-gatherer mind.

                    2. Antarctica is very nice this time of year, as the nacreous clouds color the skies in all the colors of the rainbow.

                2. I hadn't of a thought of a casino as a tool before, but you are correct on this White Indian. "Tool" is a bit primitive for marketing purposes though. Call it a "financial instrument".

            3. Also, PROTIP: Don't quote a guy whose magnum opus is about how and why agricultural societies who practiced animal husbandry shitkicked the noble hunter gatherers through a combination of guns, germs, and steel.

              1. The question isn't who is going to let me, it's who is going to stop me. ~Ayn Rand

            4. And yet the agricultural life must have appealed to them, or they would have kept up the hunter-gatherer life, instead. There are pieces that don't fit in your tidy little puzzle.

              1. The appeal of agriculture is the same as the appeal of fiat money.

                ? Something for nothing.
                ? Control and domination of others by the "emergent elite."
                ? Wealth concentration to a few.

                "Agriculture creates government." ~Richard Manning, Against the Grain, p. 73

                1. What could possibly have more of an expectation of something for nothing than a lifestyle based on foraging.

                  Which giveaway me an idea. Instead of Marching off into the wilderness, you could best approximate your ideal lifestyle by in becoming an urban forager.

                  1. Danged agricultural civilization smart phone keyboard. I curse thee.

                2. something for nothing

                  Obviously you've never worked a farm.

                  1. DON'T FEED THE TROLL.

            5. I, for one, prefer my apartment in Manhattan, with all the amenities and easily accessed takeout, to running around in the woods poking animals with sticks. But to each their own.

      2. ? Diseases of Civilization.
        ? Loss of leisure time that people enjoyed in the Original Affluent Society.
        ? Less security, more war.
        ? Humans aren't neurobioligically adapted to mass society, as evidenced by Dunbar's Number.
        ? The anthropogenic Sixth Great Extinction, loss of 200 species per day.
        A libertarians reply:
        - Diseases? people live longer lives today. So what does it really matter if there are more diseases?
        - Loss of leisure? With a rise in wealth comes the ability to pursue other interests that don't provide economic benefits.
        - More war? Check out foreignpolicy's recent article on wars. The 21st century is shaping up to be the most peaceful yet. Violence, e.g. murder, has reached historical lows in advanced nations. More war? please..
        - Aren't adapted to mass society? sure it places stresses upon us. Perhaps the only comment you made that touches on an element of truth.
        - Loss of species? meh, cares..
        In summary, there are costs to civilization, but obviously they are all outweighted by the overwhelming benefits.


        1. No, the first response is how the heck does he think he knows what these ancient peoples' lives were like based on some archaeologist's interpretation of bones and pottery found here and there. How does he know their lives weren't cruel and miserable -- especially all those whose bones will never be found.

          White Indian has constructed a mythology that suits him. The relevant text is The True Believer.

          1. That is assuming he isn't an elaborate put-on.

            1. Yup. The life he pretends to espouse - it would be quite possible for him if he really thought it worthwhile.

              Instead, he / she spends a shit load of time on the evul, civilized computer. Hope he doesn't catch a civilized virus.

        2. Civilization reduces quality of life, unless you perform mark-to-fantasy valuations.

          Agriculture is difficult, dangerous and unhealthy.

          Emergent elites led the Agricultural Revolution.

          Hierarchy is an unnecessary evil.

          Civilization must always grow.

          Civilization always pursues complexity.

          Complexity is subject to diminishing returns.

          We have passed the point of diminishing returns.

          Technology cannot stop collapse.

          Environmental problems may lead to collapse.

          Peak Oil may lead to collapse.

          Complexity ensures collapse.

          Collapse is an economizing process.

          Civilization makes us sick.

          Civilization has no monopoly on medicine.

          Civilization has no monopoly on knowledge.

          Civilization has no monopoly on art.

          Civilization reduces quality of life.

          Collapse is inevitable.

          Collapse increases quality of life.

          1. Your problem is that "collapse" is really no threat.

            All that "collapse" would mean is that we would return to the primitive, savage, shitty lifestyle of stone age deadbeats.

            So what you're essentially arguing is:

            "Because agricultural civilization might collapse, we should collapse it deliberately now."

            Don't you see how fucking idiotic that is?

            "Because I have this theory that says that billions of people might die at some indeterminate point of time in the future, I think we should exterminate billions of people now."

            Wow, what a compelling offer and argument!

      3. I think we account for those "broken window" costs quite well.

        ? Diseases of Civilization - I don't have one, so I don't care. So this broken window cost is zero, or has already been paid so now it's zero.
        ? Loss of leisure time that people enjoyed in the Original Affluent Society - Leisure time to do what? Fuck chicks who were toothless hags at 21? Stick bones through their nose and plates in their lips? Listen to some retarded demented senile asshole (at age 39, mind you) spin nonsense tales? Oh, excuse me - engage in "mythopoeic thinking". The leisure time of hunter-gatherers may as well be hell. Another zero cost.
        ? Less security, more war - This one's just false. You statistically have much less chance of being involved in violence now than you would have had in a pre-agricultural society. So there's no value to subtract here.
        ? Humans aren't neurobioligically adapted to mass society, as evidenced by Dunbar's Number Sure we are. You know how I know? Because I can watch film of recently-discovered hunter-gatherer tribes in New Guinea or the Amazon, running around barefoot with plates through their fucking lips, and I immediately react with revulsion at their primitive savagery and obviously repugnant cultures and lifestyles. If that's what you're offering as "neurobiologically" sound, no fucking thanks.
        ? The anthropogenic Sixth Great Extinction, loss of 200 species per day.Nah Mah Problem.

        So after we subtract all those zeroed-out costs, I guess we have nothing to think about.

      4. It sucks so bad that real contagious diseases have gone by the wayside and now all we have to worry about is diseases of civilization.

      5. You know, there's always a possibility, remote but real, that a giant rock or ball of ice is going to smash into this planet and kill almost every living thing. It has happened before, several times. And, unfortunately for your romantic notions of how great hunting and gathering is, hunter-gatherers wouldn't be able to do a damn thing about it but die. Only an advanced technological civilization could. Maybe Gaia encouraged the crazy monkeys to develop their tools - even though they kill each other and a lot of other living things, they could develop the ability to eventually save the biosphere so She doesn't have to start over with phytoplankton.

        You aren't going to convince anyone here that you are anything but a crank, and not even a particularly interesting one.

    2. "The wonderful thing about this is, even if it's parody, Krugman is such a clown there's no way to tell whether it's serious..."

      You mean _you_ couldn't recognize whether it was a parody or real. It is not clear to me how the fact that you and those like you got fooled is an argument in _favor_ of you and your ideology.

    3. So if you see me quoted as saying something really stupid or outrageous, and it didn't come from the Times or some other verifiable site, you should probably assume it was a fake.

      So something really stupid or outrageous and does come from the Times I should assume is real - got it!

  2. Just imagine the prosperity if only we could nuke DC from orbit.


    1. Okay, Zuo... even though We know you don't have access to orbital nukes, you're *still* getting a prostate exam next time you try to get on a commercial flight.

    2. You are a flailing STATIST-AGRICORP

    3. libya's economy will be booming soon.
      Just like Irag's and Afghanistan's 🙁

    4. libya's economy will be booming soon.
      Just like Irag's and Afghanistan's 🙁

    5. It's the only way to be sure

  3. I made that joke on an earlier thread under Krugman's name. Holy crap, it's sad that this sounds like a plausible quote to begin with!

    1. It's only implausible because the real Krugnuts would expend 1500 words to say the same thing. (I'll will give him credit for being terse on that space alien stimulus plan. He does know when he's on Teevee and the bulk of his audience is 3 year olds playing with the remote control.)

  4. Holy crap, it's sad that this sounds like a plausible quote to begin with!

    Li'l Paulie Krugnuts, being barking mad, is well and truly beyond any possible hope of effective satirization.

    1. Of course it only sounds like a plausible quote to you because you are ideologically predisposed to think that this is what Krugman (I have plenty of disagreements with him but that is another matters) sounds like.

      The fact that Reason-style "libertarians" get fooled by a hoax like this is supposed to be an argument *for* them and *against* Krugman??

  5. Yes, we would see greater economic growth.

    Because we would know exactly what to build.

    Because it would have been destroyed.

    I'm sure all economists have heard Bastiat's parable, but why do so few understand it?

    1. When will you libtards realize that
      Wasting money creates prosperity and

      Destroying capital builds wealth.

      Those are the cornerstones of Krugnutomnics.

      1. "Grifters gonna grift, yo."

        1. WOW! What an amazing coincidence! That's exactly what was written underneath my senior year photo in the high school yearbook -- !!

  6. Why don't we just randomly bomb a major American city every two years?

    1. ::scribbles furiously on notepad::

    2. 1984 is starting to make even more sense.

      1. 1984 is finally starting to seem dated.

  7. Well, as Hazlitt pointed out a while back, we can always bomb our own industries. Broken windows stimulus and a "homeland demolition" military jobs program--what's not to love?

    1. fap fap fap fap fap fap

  8. thank you very much executives like you, I really like your blog very clean and reliable link to a web site trying to get the ban I hope I do not eat many thanks
    Web sites with the music here is actually fun, chat, friendship, bi kind of people that I'm trying to create an ideal environment for fusion with each other and chat environments, and sexual issues, as well as food, drink, and even my own social networking areas, such as creating a single goal is to serve our valuable administrators hope you understand
    If you need to make

    1. It's OK, we also eat many thanks....


    2. needs caps n' brackets

  9. One of the replies to Krugman's post:
    "I'm organizing a flash mob with sledge hammers to break the shit out of everything... for America! Who's with me?"

    1. I suspect irony was lost on many

      1. Is that, like, iron or something?

    2. "PRESENT!"

      1. What "irony"?

        1. There aren't any more Hummer dealerships, but we'd set a parking lot of Jeeps on fire if it would help.

          1. I'll call some of the old gang and see if any of them can take leave from their cushy gigs to make some pipe bombs.

            Hey, Bernardine... where's my phone number list? I need to get hold of Cloward and Piven.

            1. Buncha fuckin' amateurs!!!

              1. Go on...

                1. Can we join this, erm, party?

                  1. Jus' gimme the woid, an' I can have a bunch of my... associates... help you out wit' dat.

    3. Gooood. Gooooood. Let the hate flow.

      1. You barked an order, Our Lord?

  10. so, by this logic I should torch my own house and run my car off the road... and I'd get wealthier! Sweet

  11. The comments on that are hilarious--apparently breaking windows is a good thing in a "liquidity trap" because those hoarding evil rich folks and the kkkorporations have piles of money just sitting "idle" and this will get the money moving.

    The Scrooge McDuck moneybin concept of wealth is disturbingly common.

    1. What? I didn't hear that. I was busy stuffing gold into my mattress.

  12. [unsurprised face]

  13. I guess when Peter Schiff joked about having a fake WW3, Krugman would think that was the best idea in the world. I guess we are unlucky it didn't destroy half the country then. My god, the fact that I'm smarter than him in economics is just sad.

  14. This makes me want him to debate Robert Murphy even more:

    1. by looking at the comments on that site, it looks like it is not going to happen.
      It is all spam and no one cares

  15. Let's go ransack Krugnut's hause; he'll have to replace all his stuff.

    Magical economic growth!

    Then we TP Friedman's.

    1. Y'know, "JW" (We know your real name, and you should floss more often; We've been watching)... We look the other way when SEIU loyalists knife the tires of America's enemies, but what *you* are advocating is treasonous and you will be punished someday.

      1. And look at that.

        Another one for the ignore list.

  16. The earthquake was definitely caused by global warming, as the Earth's core is hotter than the surface of the Sun itself.

    I'm totally cereal.

  17. I'm just a heartbeat away!

  18. That pearl of whistful wisdom...

    Nostalgia for the days before everyone played bridge makes me whistful.

    1. Aw, go fish!

  19. I guess we shouldn't be surprised. I mean this is the same guy who said we should use resources to build weapons to fight aliens.

  20. The worst part is that even the kindest reading, that it takes a national tragedy to induce even the most miserly stimulus, is incredibly flawed.

    I posted a longer version on Krugabe's stream or whatever, but Japan's GDP, unemployment, debt and everything else have all gotten worse since the Tohoku quake. The problem is that these disasters also destroy production capacity.

    1. Feature, not bug, in Japan's case.

    2. Amakudari, your reasoning is too sane. Production capacity is the problem, not the solution.

      Capitalism creates "an epidemic that, in all earlier epochs, would have seemed an absurdity ? the epidemic of over-production. Society suddenly finds itself put back into a state of momentary barbarism; it appears as if a famine, a universal war of devastation, had cut off the supply of every means of subsistence; industry and commerce seem to be destroyed; and why? Because there is too much civilisation, too much means of subsistence, too much industry, too much commerce."
      -- Marx & Engels, Communist Manifesto

      1. Even Marx couldn't quite get it right, though he did come pretty close.

        1. Prosperity = poverty?

        2. Marx got about as close to the truth as the Austrians. There are a few diamonds in Marx's and Mises' dunghills of writing. Same with Jesus, ya know.

      2. Capitalism creates "an epidemic that, in all earlier epochs, would have seemed an absurdity ? the epidemic of over-production. Society suddenly finds itself put back into a state of momentary barbarism; it appears as if a famine, a universal war of devastation, had cut off the supply of every means of subsistence; industry and commerce seem to be destroyed; and why? Because there is too much civilisation, too much means of subsistence, too much industry, too much commerce."

        Jesus Christ

        Why couldn't you have brought Walmat super save deals to earth in the 1830s instead of the 1950s?

  21. Oh Kruggymandias, never change. You know, I can't even imagine how much good it will do for the economy if this hurricane wipes D.C. off the map.

    1. Actually wiping out D.C. would probably do wonders for the economy.

      1. Pol Pot fantasies?

        1. You're comparing Pol Pot to Obama?

          1. Sure. Or you. What's the difference?

            Pol Pot's goal was "restarting civilization" at "year Zero."

            Maybe Pol Pot read Ayn Rand? She and most Libertarians have the same murderous fantasy: blow the whole thing up and start over; their rules this time.

            Oh, and fuck Eddie Willers.

            1. Seems to me it's the Krugmans of the world who want to blow up "the world" (in this case, "the world" = "capitalism")... and Obama's just the 'tard to do it if he gets a second term.

              But Obama's no Pol Pot. Your comparison, not mine. He's no Hitler, either. He's a piss-poor Stalin stand-in, too.

            2. Ayn Rand never advocated blowing the whole thing up, she advocated opting out and letting it collapse of its weight.


              1. Howard Roark blowing up the Cortlandt project doesn't count, huh?

                Better check your premises, John C. Randolph.

            3. Ayn Rand never advocated blowing the whole thing up, she advocated opting out and letting it collapse of its weight.


              1. This time, the 'net squirrel did you a favor by repeating the post.

                1. ...the Cortlandt Project =/= the world.

                    1. ...Pol Pot attempt to restart the Khmer Civilization =/= the world, either.

                      Civilizationists are annihilationist to the core. Ask the First Families on the Trail of Tears.

                    2. Still on that broken record, I see...

                      You do know, the past is the past, and cannot be altered. Unless you can build a time machine out of twigs and bison sinews.

                    3. Privatize.

                      Sweet Jesus, aren't musical duos by former enemies something to behold?

            4. Seriously. Most of us are more afraid that anything that Ayn Rand's scenario will come true. It was a warning, not a fantasy, dumbfuck.

    2. Yaknow, some of us live in DC. How about Irene just wipes out the Capitol Hill area? And maybe Logan Circle.

  22. If we were to put a bullet into Kruggy's brain, we would see a temporary increase in his Kinetic activity. Why shouldn't the economy work the same way?

    1. With the anthropogenic Sixth Great Extinction in progress, that is pretty much the illustration of how agricultural civilization works.

      A temporary kinetic boom, like that of fiat money, and then disaster and death.

      1. many fake names is this prick gonna use to say the same fucking shit over and over?

        1. Maybe I should take his teachings and edit them into a concise volume. I already did that to your dungill.

          1. *dunghill

            I have performed this operation for my own use, by cutting verse by verse out of the printed book, and arranging the matter which is evidently his, and which is as easily distinguishable as diamonds in a dunghill.

            1. I used to smoke Dunhills...

  23. Did Krugman remove the post from his twitter account? And forget to take it off Google+ !? Here is a comment he made in Google+:

    "I kind of like Google+ +Shari Lynn Bence , the twitter account is synced with the blog somehow. I don't know the details."

    All of the other comments are synced. He probably went to bed and will find an explosion of criticism in the morning. Haha.

    1. Knowing Krugnutz' fan base, it's likely he won't get as many negative comments as you might think.

      1. Of course not. He's making the same mistake as Austrian economists, and they can never see their own fallacy. Remember, economics is the new religion. It's accepted mostly on faith.

        Rome under the Republic had a civic religion, consisting of the reading of entrails and other sensible precautions. The civic religion of the modern world is social engineering, which depends on similar techniques of divination?

        The members of the American economics profession, as [Thurman] Arnold contended, performed a vital practical role in maintaining this unique system of corporate socialism American style. It was their role to prevent the American public from achieving a correct understanding of the actual workings of the American economic system. Economists instead were assigned the task to dispense priestly blessings that would allow business to operate independent of damaging political manipulation. They accomplished this task by means of their message of "laissez faire religion, based on a conception of a society composed of competing individuals." However false as a description of the actual U.S. economy, this vision in the mind of the American public was in practice "transferred automatically to industrial organizations with nation-wide power and dictatorial forms of government." Even though the arguments of economists were misleading and largely fictional, the practical ? and beneficial ? result of their deception was to throw a "mantle of protection ? over corporate government" from various forms of outside interference. Admittedly, as the economic "symbolism got farther and farther from reality, it required more and more ceremony to keep it up." But as long as this arrangement worked and there could be maintained "the little pictures in the back of the head of the ordinary man," the effect was salutary ? "the great [corporate] organization was secure in its freedom and independence." It was this very freedom and independence of business professionals to pursue the correct scientific answer ? the efficient answer ? on which the economic progress of the United States depended.

        ? Robert H. Nelson, REACHING FOR HEAVEN ON EARTH

        Economic efficiency has been the greatest source of social legitimacy in the United States for the past century, and economists have been the priesthood defending this core social value of our era.

        ? Robert H. Nelson, ECONOMICS AS RELIGION

        1. Government is the other, competing religion... and you, "Spock", are a slobbering True Believer.

          Oh, and drop the schtick... White Indian.

        2. Needs more brackets, maybe 100 extra words of rambling incontinence and [EMPIRE] before you can attain the glories of HERCULE TRIATHLON SAVINIEN.


        3. Do you trolls have access to my incif file, so you know when to change your name?

        4. haha, austrian economics isn't the one propagating the broken window fallacy.

          also, if you're going to get above a D- you're going to need to do more than quote dead crackpots.

  24. Somebody should start a "Fake Paul Krugman" page like "Fake Steve Jobs".

    1. ... and then put insane-sounding actual quotes from Krugman on it that almost look too screwy to be real.

      1. Krugabe on 9/11:

        The terror attack -- like the original day of infamy, which brought an end to the Great Depression, could even do some economic good. ...

        First, the driving force behind the economic slowdown has been a plunge in business investment. Now, all of a sudden, we need some new office buildings. ...

        Second, the attack opens the door to some sensible recession-fighting measures. For the last few weeks there has been a heated debate among liberals over whether to advocate the classic Keynesian response to economic slowdown ... There were plausible economic arguments in favor of such a move, but it was questionable whether Congress could agree on how to spend the money in time to be of any use ... Now it seems that we will indeed get a quick burst of public spending.

        1. The only man on earth that could take the "Broken Window" and run with it. How can one have absolutely no sense of what capital destruction is?

          It really explains why he's such a proponent of central planning.

        2. Holy fuck.

          I can hardly believe believe that somebody in his position could have such an utter lack of good taste and any sense of decency to actually publish something like that three days after the fact.

          I mean.....HOLY FUCK.

    2. That was a fake Paul Krugman site.

      1. LOLs!

        It would have been better if he'd called himself Fake Krugman...

        Then instead of it not being as funny as it could have been because of the false name--it would have been even funnier because of the parts about it that rang true.

  25. Only among professional economists and their clingers-on could you find such fundamentally stupid analysis of a natural disaster as causing economic growth. I mean, every single time a major natural disaster occurs, you see the area affected suffer a long slog toward restoring productive capacity. If you have to invent ways that theoretically a disaster would be great, you're just really fucking stupid:

    [The Prophet]'s original point isn't calling for a tidal wave. He's more arguing that, say, there sure are a lot of people who could use some money and some other people who can't invest it gainfully, and since Congress won't put America to work maybe God will give them something to do?

    It's very easy to see that the earthquake in Japan massively damaged non-idle resources. [The Bible] does not say that people who HAD jobs, and homes, and powerplants would be somehow advantaged if that were to disappear. That won't stimulate the economy, it'll depress the economy just like the Broken Window Fallacy said it would.

    So the point is that there is a line which is, "Does the economy have slack?" When you try to argue that the Apple Store cannot afford to repair a single window because we're in a recession, you're on the wrong side of [the Bible]. Yes, it obviously can. ...

    If you try to argue that we should blow up the world to stimulate the economy, you're also on the wrong side of [the Bible]. Which is why [the Prophet] doesn't argue this.

    I replaced the parts where he mentioned his religious preference with something with which I think people here may be more familiar.

    1. Every time a field is plowed, it is a catastrophic natural disaster.

      It's like breaking windows annually, and does things like turning the Cedar Forests of Mesopotamia into the deserts of Iraq in a few short years.

      1. So... how do you live, White Indian? Do you practice what you preach? Do you hunt and forage... when you're not using technology to berate everyone else for using technology?

        Fuckin' hypocrite.

        1. Of course not, he would have to give up electricity, a wireless router, and his computer at a minimum. No savior of mankind could do without his Mac that his parents bought for him.

          1. Maybe he uses a public library... one built on a spoooooky ancient Indian burial ground. And there's a van with a talking dog and a stoner and some of their meddlesome friends parked around the corner.

            1. I'm starting to think he might just live in the men's room at the public library

              1. Rage on, howling monkeys, as you absorb my wisdom. You will learn by the numbers. I will teach you.

                Isn't Stanley Kubrick just divine?

                1. And AC said: "LET THERE BE LIGHT!" And there was light....

                2. Worst. Kubrick. Joke. Ever.

                  1. ...Eyes Wide Shut was the worst Kubrick joke, ever.

                    1. Experience the concentrated suck that was his botch of The Shining once more, and get back to me.

      2. Such an idiot. When a window is broken, you've shortened its economic life. When you bought the window, you invested in it with an expected lifespan of X years. Broken, it's lasted X - Y years. It's a net capital loss. That capital is GONE, destroyed by childish actions.

        Food is purchased with an expected lifetime of X. Unless you let it spoil, you've achieved your expected result by consuming the food before it spoils. Letting the food spoil will give you the X - Y capital loss too though.

        So yes, it is like a broken window, except not really. It's more like plowing a field annually to let the food spoil to meet this criteria. I think I've sufficiently explained your idiocy, and I hope nobody else falls prey to it.

  26. So then, I guess Japan just did it wrong somehow? Because their quake had a major negative impact on GDP and the stock market.

    Come to think of it, "they just did it wrong" *is* a common refrain amongst Keynesians when discussing Japan.

    1. You see, I'm not actually trampling Tokyo because I'm a giant mutant monster full of rage, I'm doing it to get the economy going. It's all love, baby!

    2. Oh, and if anyone cared to notice, Japan got downgraded by Moody's earlier today for carrying too much debt. But somehow it's not enough.

  27. Imagine the relief to the owners of all those damaged buildings to know that they are playing a part in the grand Krugman plan to restore our economy and create jobby jobby jobs.

    Krugman has just provided an effective reductio ad absurdems against the idea of stimulus.

  28. Hmmm...this must explain the economic slump. The GWoT has robbed us of all opportunities to prosper through random acts of homeland destruction!

  29. Look on the bright side everyone, Hurricane Irene will be slamming into Flordia this weekend. JOBS AND PROSPERITY FOR EVERYONE!

    1. Are you serious?

    2. Are you serious???

      1. That's MY line, fuckhead.

  30. See this? It's my sad face. It's because someone plowed their own backyard garden somewhere in this stolen homeland of mine, here on Vulcan, which orbits your Sun, which we call "That Which is Cooler Than the Core of The Planet You Call Earth".

  31. I got say the twitter responses under #krugmanstimulus are hilarious. This is my favorite: I say we invest in giant rocket engines to attach to the dark side of the moon, and slam the moon into earth.

    1. I tried that with Space: 1999, but somehow it just didn't have the same punch.

  32. So destroying things is good for the economy?

    If so, people should beat the shit out of Krugman and destroy his face.

    It's for the good of the economy...and the children.

    1. So destroying things is good for the economy?

      It is? Damn! We've been bombing the wrong country!

  33. Now, now, he's not saying we should destroy the economy. He's saying we're better off if an extrinsic shock does the work. Just like the aliens, it's not like we're summoning them or an earthquake, they just come and mess shit up.

    That's marginally less retarded.

    1. It seems more retarded. If we destroy things, we can target the destruction plus provide jobs in implementing the destruction. If we leave it to chance, there's not enough central planning.

  34. Also, just so you know exactly how few ideas there are among his neo-Keynesian acolytes, I present to you Richard Horton:

    Money that would have gone into savings for future consumption, is instead consumed now--otherwise face the paradox of thrift.

    Saving is bad inside the paradox of thrift.

    The Keynesian argument is not that destroying things creates new wealth. The argument is that it trades future consumption for current consumption to the benefit of the jobless and to the benefit of the economy as a whole in the long run by avoiding the negative outcomes of the paradox of thrift.

    Paradox of Thrift. Saving now results in reduced total saving that would be possible if money was spent now.

    Sticky prices prevent the price level from adjusting appropriately, resulting in the reduction of the consumption-investment ratio and thus the paradox of thrift ensues.

    Sticky Prices --> Paradox of Thrift --> Increased total Savings

    The only criticism I have on a cursory reading (and thank you for being so courteous) is that you have left the Pardox of Thrift out of your Keynesian analysis.

    In a nutshell the paradox of thrift says that because everyone is trying to save simultaneously for their own benefit they actually reduce the total amount of saving for everyone as a result of inadequate consumption.


    1. Yeah, I saw his brand of wisdom in the G+ stream.

      He was pretty much sliced and diced by the end, but unsurprisingly, no minds were changed, at least on paper.

  35. You're wrong... the Earthquake lasted longer than a few seconds. You obviously didn't experience it, dude. It lasted long enough for me to think (1) I was having an alcohol related seizure, then (2) that my water heater was about to blow, and (3) gettin' my dogs out of the house before it collapsed, then (4) realizing it was actually an earthquake. 45 seconds, bitch!!

  36. Note: the Washington monument falling will not cause greater economic activity.

    I do not want it to fall for any political reason.

    I just like destruction for the sake of destruction.

  37. Is there a term for when someone performs a reducio ad absurdum on himself? There should be. Preferably a German one.

    1. I prefer to call it rhetorical auto-fellatio.

      1. How about 'auto-reducio' ?

        1. "Tonyism."

    2. Arschloch

  38. The fact that a nobel prize winner can be countered with rap lyrics is very uplifting:

    Your so-called "stimulus" will make things even worse
    It's just more of the same, more incentives perversed
    And that credit crunch ain't a liquidity trap
    Just a broke banking system, I'm done, that's a wrap.

  39. This is why London was so pleased with The Blitz.

    1. Its why Germany needed no help after WW2, the economy was booming like crazy so they sent money to America to thank us!!!

  40. I guess White Indian is going to ruin every thread now.

    1. That is why I finally incifed him. But if he is going to rotate thru names, no such luck.


      1. I begged you weeks ago.

  41. The real reason Krugman doesn't care about the broken windows fallacy is because the people with windows don't count to Krugman.

    Destroying their windows to provide employment for unionized window installers makes sense to Krugman because the unionized window installers are important to him and the people who own windows are just fuckers who deserve what's coming to them.

    His attitude toward the currency is just another version of window breaking.

    He's perfectly happy to see the value of the currency in your pocket or strongbox or bank destroyed, if that benefits "workers". It's not really any different to have an earthquake smash your property into dust. Either way, it benefits the people he wants to get benefits, at the expense of the people he openly admits he wants to fuck over.

    Instead of "Fuck off, slaver," Krugman says, "Fuck off, saver."

    Improvements to real property are a form of "savings". Krugman openly admits he is happy to destroy savings if it benefits the jobless. What difference does it make to him if it's your cash or your building?

  42. So, let me see if I've got this right. We should attack ourselves with nuclear weapons, because that would stimulate the economy.

  43. So Krugnuts did finally delete the post.

    My favorite comment came from my fianc?e after I showed her his stream: "Do you think you could get me one of those Nobel Prizes too?" I was tempted to explain that that's not how it works, but soon realized I had no evidence to support such a position.

  44. If we all went to Krugman's residence and broke his windows, would it be a crime?

    Or stimulus?

  45. It looks like it may have been a spoof... as the profile has been deleted.

  46. Krugman just tweeted this link:


    and then there's this:

    1. What a whiny, chinless bitch Krugabe is.

  47. If assets were destroyed by an earthquake, wouldn't they in fact be replaced by fewer assets due to the cost of replacing them, with a period of time where the replacements were not even available? This is economic growth, how? Wealth is not created by destroying assets.

  48. Wow OK man I never thought about it like that before. WOw.

  49. Oh, well, it was *still* fun.

    Easy to see how you were fooled, though, Riggs... it sounded like something Krugabe would say.

  50. I think the fact that everybody could believe Paul Krugman saying that says a lot about Krugman.

    1. And by everyone, you mean libertarian retards. Only you Trig-lites fell for this shit.

      1. Was the shit about space aliens fake too?

  51. if you see me quoted as saying something really stupid or outrageous, and it didn't come from the Times or some other verifiable site, you should probably assume it was a fake.

    Only believe the stupidly outrageous things I actually say!

    1. Yeah like fighting space aliens.

    2. As I scrolled through this thread, I didn't think anyone was EVER going to tackle that.

      I mean, that's the real jewel in this story, right?

  52. So if you see me quoted as saying something really stupid or outrageous, and it didn't come from the Times or some other verifiable site, you should probably assume it was a fake.

    In short, only trust the really stupid and outrageous stuff that actually gets printed.

  53. yeee fake. sure whatever.

  54. Hilarious. So, I guess the people in the Google+ thread attempting to defend his argument are a little embarrassed now.

    1. Yeah that's one of the funniest things about it to me. At any rate this is not, in principle, any different from when he said a massive mobilization to defeat space aliens would end the economic contraction.

    2. Poe's Law.

  55. "So if you see me quoted as saying something really stupid or outrageous, and it didn't come from the Times or some other verifiable site, you should probably assume it was a fake."

    What should we do if we see him quoted as saying something really stupid or outrageous, and it does come from the Times?

    Cuz that happens, like, every day.

  56. So we all learned a valuable lesson.

    Can we now stop the fake tony posts so I can actually argue with him rather then parodies???

    If you feel to the need too spoof him then at least mark the name as a spoof...aka spoof tony, fake tony, not real tony etc.

  57. Doesn't using a fake name violate the Google+ terms of service?

    1. I don't know...

      But when i heard Krugman got an account and Google would not give me one i was pissed.

      The fact that it has no proven to be fake has eased my anger a bit.

  58. So Krugnuts finally admits he writes all manner of stupid shit in his column.

    So if you see me quoted as saying something really stupid or outrageous, and it didn't come from the Times or some other verifiable site . . .

    Of course we don't need to go any further than the NYT to "find something really stupid or outrageous".

    1. I thought every comment here was going to be some variation of this joke. So far I've only seen like 3?


      So if you see me quoted as saying something really stupid or outrageous, and it didn't come from the Times ...

      ..."then they have been violating my copyright."

      Instead, the first 150 posts were trolls... not really "defending" krugman...just sort of poop-throwing.

      Really, talking economics with teh librals is not very funny. You can't arm-wrestle paraplegics.

      Given that the predominant theory in late 2008-early 2009 was that "libertarian policy" (pppt) destroyed the economy.... what's the explanation *since then*?

      Not *enough* taxation+ regulation+handouts to unions = ..."stimulus"?

      1. Really, dealing with teh libertarians is very funny. You can't ass-rape the willing.

        1. That doesn't even make sense.

  59. Mike Riggs, just another Koch sucker.

  60. I find the defenders of the hoax quite interesting. They keep saying it was justified because they thought it really was what Krugman sounded like.

    First of all, to pretend that someone said something he didn't--no matter how much *you* feel it's a logical extension of things he did say--is a lie. I therefore must conclude that "libertarians" (or the people who are misnamed that in America--Murray Rothbard admitted he stole the word from the European anti-statist Left) think that lying is justified if in their cause. Very instructive!

    Second, they keep on saying that the very fact that the hoax fooled people shows that it is close to what Krugman really thinks. Maybe instead the fact that it fooled *you* is a clue to how ideologically blinkered you are, and how easily you will swallow lies if directed at your enemies.

    1. Or maybe it's because he made similar comments after 9/11, after the Tohoku earthquake, about the Great War ending the Great Depression, and about a space alien invasion. And it was convincing enough that not a single of his supporters commented on his stream that it must be a spoof. On the contrary, many were defending him. But that's just me.

      But if it's more convenient, cling to strawmen about us evil libertarians hanging our beliefs on defamation.

  61. "So if you see me quoted as saying something really stupid or outrageous, and it didn't come from the Times or some other verifiable site, you should probably assume it was a fake."

    So, if I'm following that correctly, he's saying that all the stupid or outrageous shit he says in the New York Times is still outrageous or stupid though, right?

  62. Krugman's defense is somehow worse than what fake Krugman said. He said the only reason disasters aren't a stimulus in this country is because we don't spend enough on disaster relief.

  63. Thanks a lot for sharing. Keep up the good work. Can anyone help me out with
    snapdeal customer care number?? I am confused

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.