tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post113547126053146971..comments2024-03-18T07:59:05.430-05:00Comments on The Grumpy Economist: Stimulus and EtiquetteJohn H. Cochranehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04842601651429471525noreply@blogger.comBlogger50125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-6631688801980599542013-05-15T09:32:29.137-05:002013-05-15T09:32:29.137-05:00With all due respect Mr Cochrane the first part of...With all due respect Mr Cochrane the first part of this is something of a retreat from previous critiques of the basic tenets of Keynesianism I've read by you.claims pages jobshttp://www.claimspagescareers.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-15936590075048145112012-03-20T08:35:54.236-05:002012-03-20T08:35:54.236-05:00I got about half way thought your article and I ha...I got about half way thought your article and I have a question.<br /><br />Are all economists now like politicians and totally devoid of having a rational conversation? <br /><br />You talk about stimulus and infrastructure and I can hear your condescension though your writing. You quickly devolve in digging holes, natural disasters, Buffalo and Greece. <br /><br />Here is the problem, unemployment. If you have a solution then say it, if not find a new profession.<br /><br />Thanks for nothing.DanFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13160544160865980409noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-80759999125794620152012-01-30T10:04:44.087-06:002012-01-30T10:04:44.087-06:00"Running around for years" - John walks ..."Running around for years" - John walks fast but I've never seen him run. He likes to fly, though. <br /><br />"Lofty academic perch" - like Paul Krugman? Then any economist at a university can't debate the issues? Or they only can have an opinion if they're pro-stimulus? <br /><br />"Without bothering to understand the models" - prove it. How does he not understand the models? And don't say because he believes in Say's law, or he's hung up on accounting identities. John's addressed these straw men already. <br /><br />"Finally realized his mistake" - what? Where? How? <br /><br />"Team Republican" - John is a libertarian. Big difference. <br /><br />"Well-deserved insults" - well-deserved if you're a child who can't debate the issues without resorting to name-calling.Paulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04521597937232113169noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-14111866514063670642012-01-28T15:07:38.869-06:002012-01-28T15:07:38.869-06:00Look, this guy has been running round for years, u...Look, this guy has been running round for years, using his lofty academic perch to argue against stimulus, without bothering to understand the models he was criticizing. By doing so, he has contributed to massive suffering in this country. Now he tries to back out of his hole without even apologizing! <br /><br />Now he's finally realized his mistake, he should be loudly proclaiming himself in favor of using debt-funded fiscal policy and infrastructure spending (as in Obama's jobs program, for example). But he plays for team Republican above everything else, so he won't.<br /><br />Spare us the bleeding heart over some well-deserved insults...rob.impa.brhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09997250847068598127noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-24315279109699477662012-01-26T17:04:23.194-06:002012-01-26T17:04:23.194-06:00John:
I hope the nasty, childish comments that y...John: <br /><br />I hope the nasty, childish comments that your blog has generated won't discourage you from continuing to post your thoughts. Many of us truly want to hear what you have to say. <br /><br />The blogosphere truly HAS become a schoolyard playground, thanks to the online behavior of Krugman and Delong and their merry band of loyal little lackies. It SHOULD be a dinner party, as John suggests, but Paul and his nasty followers have made sure the debate is poisoned and on the level of a 10 year old.<br /><br />Paul's defense? I've never insulted Ken Rogoff! Lucky Ken! One of the lucky few! Other economists (Cochrane, Taylor, Mulligan, Metzler, Barro, Mankiw, Scott Summers, Lucas, Kotlikoff - does the list ever end?) are not so lucky, but are fortunately grown-up enough to suffer Paul's insults. <br /><br />Another defense of Paul: I'm right, they're wrong, and their ideas are hurting people ("this is not a dinner party"). On the basis of such delusional thoughts, not to mention the unbearable and insufferable self-importance, Paul justifies slinging insults at his colleagues. <br /><br />The defense of some of the internet children: Paul never explicitly calls John a mendacious idiot. For one thing: who cares? This is supposed to be an economics blog. But only those truly in thrall to the cult of Paul can convince themselves that this is a credible defense. O.K. - he never explicitly calls John a mendacious idiot. He just says that it's ok to treat people like mendacious idiots if they truly are a mendacious idiot. Then he mentions John in the next paragraph. <br /><br />And the attempt of these people to portray John as some sort of overly sensitive, easily offended wimp (Paul is a meanie!) is so transparently lame and unconvincing. Here's the sequence: <br />Paul Krugman: You're dumb, you're an idiot, you can't read, you're a liar. <br />John Cochrane: Grow up. Adults can disagree without calling each other names. There's alot we don't know here. <br />Internet trolls: Stop whining, John, you wimp! <br /><br />John should follow Greg Mankiw and just make this a comment-free blog. Why bother? (The comments section of various blogs are filled with people complaining about Greg's not allowing comments). <br /><br />God bless John for standing up to Paul, a once respected economist now doing a good Joe McCarthy imitation (and Brad's Roy Cohn is not bad, either).Paulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04521597937232113169noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-49402607783337881472012-01-26T16:05:46.538-06:002012-01-26T16:05:46.538-06:00Maybe the post should be entitled "stimulus a...Maybe the post should be entitled "stimulus and strawmen", for the attacks on arguments no one is making.<br /><br />To pick one disingenuous point, the author says "The facts are far from decisive. The right says: "The government spent like a drunken sailor and we still had an awful recession. Stimulus Failed" The left says "It would have been way worse without the stimulus." As if each statement is equally valid. When the right says we had a bad recession anyway, it pretends the stimulus came before the recession, not the other way around. Since I have trouble believing anyone has forgotten something that obvious just three years later, I have to conclude anyone who says that is lying. The author should have made clear such a statement is factually wrong.erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11042136938315947984noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-42955273402969733152012-01-26T11:37:26.864-06:002012-01-26T11:37:26.864-06:00There's just no way to save face here JC, but ...There's just no way to save face here JC, but the attempt is understandable...Vinicius Y.https://www.blogger.com/profile/11825207678976201349noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-35621086356883803282012-01-26T09:45:01.466-06:002012-01-26T09:45:01.466-06:00I got to the end of the road here and thought I sh...I got to the end of the road here and thought I should join the long list of people giving you mad props for ranting about taking "the high road" for half the blog all the while lying about what people have "called you."<br /><br />you've earned every right wing dollar you've made.Patrick Batemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06571159940937426353noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-78057178410191591832012-01-26T09:33:48.495-06:002012-01-26T09:33:48.495-06:00did you take inflation into account? how about pop...did you take inflation into account? how about population growth (and therefor natural government services growth?) <br /><br />Did either cross your mind before you through up a random number and started claiming professionals (who happen to choose a career in the public sector) should NOT EVER GET RAISES!?!?!!!<br /><br />Clearly you've never run a large budget before. Part of the budgeting process includes compensation for both new (inexperienced and cheaper) and experienced (the opposite) and all along the spectrum. GIving raises should not radically increase the budget... if you did it right in the first place.... (also you do standard budget increases for inflation too!)<br /><br />Your fallacy here just expresses so perfectly the trouble so many people have with separating macro and micro behavior.<br /><br />So new rule of thumb... ?... If you cant understand this simple macro budget when it comes to "raises" why don't you leave big macro stuff (like the whole economy) to those of us who do?<br /><br />If wishes were horses...Patrick Batemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06571159940937426353noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-19491822358013897632012-01-26T06:21:06.508-06:002012-01-26T06:21:06.508-06:00Krugman did not call you, by name, mendacious. But...Krugman did not call you, by name, mendacious. But after reading this post I am giving him my full permission to call you just that: mendacious.polderboyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16240196698679228337noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-48554523131781273392012-01-26T06:06:15.264-06:002012-01-26T06:06:15.264-06:00Beautiful and excellent! Perfect analogyBeautiful and excellent! Perfect analogypolderboyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16240196698679228337noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-55367142166144602252012-01-25T14:54:07.839-06:002012-01-25T14:54:07.839-06:00You wrote, "Krugman calls me, by name, a '...You wrote, "Krugman calls me, by name, a 'Mendacious idiot'" and then linked to a Krugman post that does no such thing. You made a false accusation against Krugman that anyone who clicks on the link you provide can easily check.<br /><br />Krugman does not coin the phrase "mendacious idiot" but instead defends himself against Alex Tabborak's accuastion that "one thing remains constant in all of Krugman’s writings, anyone who disagrees with him is portrayed as a mendacious idiot." He is making the point that the criticism he levels at you and others is something different than portraying you as a mendacious idiot. Here's what he says about you:<br /><br />"Now, what about people like Cochrane? You need to bear two things in mind. First, he and his friends entered this whole debate by declaring that Keynesian economics of any stripe was total nonsense, “fairy tales” that nobody serious believes. Then they proceeded to make howling, basic errors. And I was supposed to respond politely? I’ve never gone ad hominem on them — but I’ve called nonsense and ignorance when I see them. So?"<br /><br />Krugman said you made "howling, basic errors" and characterized some of your statements as "nonsense" and "ignorance." He was playing hardball but the words on the page make it clear that he did not call you "by name, a 'mendacious idiot.'" Why did you write that he did so? Didn't you expect any of your readers to click on the link to check for themselves?Peter Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14379152959191477730noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-86552871333581920892012-01-25T09:36:48.031-06:002012-01-25T09:36:48.031-06:00With all due respect Mr Cochrane the first part of...With all due respect Mr Cochrane the first part of this is something of a retreat from previous critiques of the basic tenets of Keynesianism I've read by you.Brummagem Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00998868549766033751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-43730521592318772002012-01-25T08:12:23.370-06:002012-01-25T08:12:23.370-06:00Good to see even the most radical anti-Keynesians ...Good to see even the most radical anti-Keynesians coming to their senses and seeing that Keynes was right after all. That's what the last few years proved to us after: that Keynes was right, that recessions don't happen because workers decide to take a break, and that well-timed government intervention can improve the situation. <br /><br />Congratulations on your about-face, Prof Cochrane! That's how real scientists act when they see they were wrong. Now if you want my advice, don't call other economists names just because they had reached those conclusions before you.Felipe Paithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02610076681202658502noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-89341648501613423372012-01-25T01:50:56.524-06:002012-01-25T01:50:56.524-06:00If there has been a blog post with more scare quot...If there has been a blog post with more scare quotes in it, I have not seen it. I stopped counting at around a dozen.<br /><br />As a whole, it makes your argument seem overwrought, even hysterical.<br /><br />Seeing that sort of table-banging, I would suspect you to be the proverbial lawyer with neither the facts nor the law on his side.<br /><br />After all, once you have allowed that of course any positive expected value project should be done on merit, and of course the best time to do that is using otherwise idle capital and labor, well then it seems that you are just doing backwards somersaults over Keynes' grave.mere mortalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16275003877074225894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-80811470600252740342012-01-25T00:21:40.374-06:002012-01-25T00:21:40.374-06:00I second Jake Lopata’s point.I second Jake Lopata’s point.Ralph Musgravehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09443857766263185665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-13632484475114285352012-01-25T00:18:38.513-06:002012-01-25T00:18:38.513-06:00This comment has been removed by the author.Ralph Musgravehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09443857766263185665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-36663060628240016832012-01-25T00:03:22.312-06:002012-01-25T00:03:22.312-06:00ps to quote Noah Smith:
"Our existing roads ...ps to quote Noah Smith:<br /><br />"Our existing roads and bridges - which clearly do NOT lead to "nowhere" - are falling apart. Even Obama's ARRA "stimulus" did very little to correct the problem. And instead of borrowing more money to fix our crumbling public goods, at a time when borrowing costs are historically low, conservatives are demanding that we tighten our belts and "starve the beast." We are not even close to addressing the question of whether to bury jars full of money.<br /><br />So why doesn't Cochrane stand up and loudly advocate a massive debt-financed program of road and bridge repair? Is it because the public might get the wrong idea, and start believing in "stimulus" of the hole-filling variety? Is it because infrastructure investment must be politically sacrificed in order to "starve the beast" and fight against creeping socialism? Is it just because Paul Krugman and Brad DeLong are mean mean meanies?<br /><br />For crying out loud!"rob.impa.brhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09997250847068598127noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-47664961820579891332012-01-25T00:00:20.234-06:002012-01-25T00:00:20.234-06:00What I don't understand is how you can write w...What I don't understand is how you can write with certainty about the economy yet you also write "So, there is a lot of uncertainty and a lot we don't know about how the macroeconomy works."<br /><br />To give an example of your certainty - you wrote "First, if money is not going to be printed, it has to come from somewhere. If the government borrows a dollar from you, that is a dollar that you do not spend, or that you do not lend to a company to spend on new investment. Every dollar of increased government spending must correspond to one less dollar of private spending. Jobs created by stimulus spending are offset by jobs lost from the decline in private spending. We can build roads instead of factories, but fiscal stimulus can’t help us to build more of both. This form of “crowding out” is just accounting, and doesn't rest on any perceptions or behavioral assumptions. "<br /><br />The latter is written as if you are absolutely sure of yourself, and it is used by politicians to make decisions that have large consequences for a lot of people. And here I agree with Krugman: this is not a game. Your statements as a university professor do have consequences. So if you are not certain you should say so, every time you are not certain. If not, you are responsible for the bad policies that are based on your uncertain statements.<br /><br />By the way I also don't understand why every dollar of increased government spending must correspond to one less dollar of private spending. In my understanding there is currently a lot of cash sitting idle, doing nothing at all. If the government took that cash (as taxes) and spent it on projects for the common good (like getting rid of all those potholes that damage my car, or not further shortening the school year), there clearly would be more spending. I think your statement on “crowding out” only pertains to a situation of (near) full employment.fatherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01468798359055286790noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-31120155912596915722012-01-24T23:51:23.943-06:002012-01-24T23:51:23.943-06:00ugh. either you're really quite stupid or just...ugh. either you're really quite stupid or just a total asshole. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume the former.rob.impa.brhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09997250847068598127noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-60711135502891321612012-01-24T21:43:30.608-06:002012-01-24T21:43:30.608-06:00Swimulus! This post made my day. :-)Swimulus! This post made my day. :-)J Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02920582622819878261noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-17461969723571639712012-01-24T21:42:20.636-06:002012-01-24T21:42:20.636-06:00This comment has been removed by the author.J Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02920582622819878261noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-75821988519910313012012-01-24T20:07:00.642-06:002012-01-24T20:07:00.642-06:00Exactly. Ad hominem attacks are equivalent to &quo...Exactly. Ad hominem attacks are equivalent to "X is an unworthy human being, therefore X is wrong." I don't find that in anything you link to.John Muccigrossohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06544834631983054987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-50175706185736741702012-01-24T18:24:48.662-06:002012-01-24T18:24:48.662-06:00"we increased public employee compensation (L..."we increased public employee compensation (L, S,& Federal) more than $500B per year over CPI since 1998"<br /><br />You mean 500 MILLION, right? Otherwise you have roughly a 6 trillion increase in real dollars just for INCREASES in public sector wages, let alone the pre-increase numbers.Filippakoshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18279889799138476799noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-24517741637967818032012-01-24T18:20:14.971-06:002012-01-24T18:20:14.971-06:00I am trying to decipher which one of the points ma...I am trying to decipher which one of the points made by the saltwater professors was incorrect opr which rebuke was undeserved. <br /><br />Now that you have reversed yourself entirely and concluded that stimulus may help, and that denouncing stimulus is wrong even though that was your clearly stated position just a bit ago, you should just outright admit it. The dismissal of Keynesianism and countercyclical spending as "not taught for decades" was an foolish attempt to discredit the only model that has had predictive success in the current circumstances. It was incorrect, rude and misleading but now you complain about the tough responses. It is completely clear to any reader that your slavish devotion to a waning ideology is a determinant in the faulty argumentation.<br /><br />The proper response in this circumstance is, "I was wrong, you were right, and I will pay much closer attention in the future, thank you for the education". Perhap openness to learning beyond your chosen paradigm was not a major crtiteria in your arrival at your present position.kaypeahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09591729251868581124noreply@blogger.com