4 ms·

> to fight this recession, as OTHER GUY put it, Alan Greenspan needs to create a housing bubble to replace the Nasdaq bubble. it's clear that Krugman is talkin

> to fight this recession, as OTHER GUY put it, Alan Greenspan needs to create a housing bubble to replace the Nasdaq bubble. it's clear that Krugman is talking about someone else (Paul McCully)'s phrasing of some advice. What isn't clear is whether Krugman also thinks this advice is a good idea. It seems that way from my reading it - unless Krugman thinks ending the ression is not desirable. It's anything but clear, though. "your interpretation is incorrect" is a reasonable opinion. "I don't see how anyone could interpret it that way" sounds like hyperbole. A formal language used on social networks could solve problems like this. A record of accurate predictions made in a formal language could be a solid source of reputation. https://github.com/neyer/dewDrop https://github.com/neyer/dewDrop

mikeyouse 12y ago
The difference really just lies in whether you think that a prediction of an outcome somehow is an endorsement of that outcome. I think the Patriots are going to win the Superbowl, but frankly I don't care if they do or not. The entire context of the Krugman article was the administration's insistence that the tax cuts were stimulative and were bringing the economy back. He rightly predicted that in an effort to aid that narrative (since Greenspan had given them political cover), the Fed would keep rates low for longer than was healthy. He also rightly predicted that these actions would lead to a housing bubble. It's a huge leap to go from reading these predictions to assuming that Krugman supported that outcome. He talks specifically about how this isn't a normal inflation-driven recession that can be fixed with Fed action, which just gives greater evidence to his lack of support for a housing bubble. Add to that, other contemporary articles where Krugman loudly warns of an impending housing bubble / burst, and it's clear what he thought of Greenspan's actions. From Aug. 2005[1], an article that drew a loud critique: Meanwhile, the U.S. economy has become deeply dependent on the housing bubble. The economic recovery since 2001 has been disappointing in many ways, but it wouldn't have happened at all without soaring spending on residential construction, plus a surge in consumer spending largely based on mortgage refinancing. Did I mention that the personal savings rate has fallen to zero? Now we're starting to hear a hissing sound, as the air begins to leak out of the bubble. And everyone - not just those who own Zoned real estate - should be worried. You don't need a reputation engine, just some critical eye and enough context. [1] - http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/08/opinion/08krugman.html http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/08/opinion/08krugman.html

mikeyouse 12y ago

The difference really just lies in whether you think that a prediction of an outcome somehow is an endorsement of that outcome. I think the Patriots are going to win the Superbowl, but frankly I don't care if they do or not. The entire context of the Krugman article was the administration's insistence that the tax cuts were stimulative and were bringing the economy back. He rightly predicted that in an effort to aid that narrative (since Greenspan had given them political cover), the Fed would keep rates low for longer than was healthy. He also rightly predicted that these actions would lead to a housing bubble. It's a huge leap to go from reading these predictions to assuming that Krugman supported that outcome. He talks specifically about how this isn't a normal inflation-driven recession that can be fixed with Fed action, which just gives greater evidence to his lack of support for a housing bubble. Add to that, other contemporary articles where Krugman loudly warns of an impending housing bubble / burst, and it's clear what he thought of Greenspan's actions. From Aug. 2005[1], an article that drew a loud critique: Meanwhile, the U.S. economy has become deeply dependent on the housing bubble. The economic recovery since 2001 has been disappointing in many ways, but it wouldn't have happened at all without soaring spending on residential construction, plus a surge in consumer spending largely based on mortgage refinancing. Did I mention that the personal savings rate has fallen to zero? Now we're starting to hear a hissing sound, as the air begins to leak out of the bubble. And everyone - not just those who own Zoned real estate - should be worried. You don't need a reputation engine, just some critical eye and enough context. [1] - http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/08/opinion/08krugman.html http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/08/opinion/08krugman.html