Re: Antler and Krugman and the leading indicators of Damocles

On 18 Oct 2003 01:23:49 +0100, Chris Stiles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Grinch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >Here's where PK got wind of Damocles:
>> 
>> Yeah, he "got wind".  ;-)
>> 
>
>Ah yes, that would be that yellow and anti-US organ the Economist, which
>reported more or less verbatim what Krugman chose to use in his column.

Yes indeed, more third-hand reporting on Krugman's part copied from
someone else, which left the unchecked first-hand source -- the author
of the Damocles report itself -- saying ...

"Krugman can be somewhat twisted and bitter on
occasion. This analytic tool was not intended to be applied to
developed countries. Damocles gave him an in to write a piece he
wanted to write. He's making a career out of this kind of thing."  
 
What part of this is too hard for Krugman fans to understand?

Yes, it was just like PK "heard" about Fraga, McCain, SS& Medicare,
etc. 

Or perhaps you believe Krugman said nothing false about Fraga -- so he
had no reason to beg not to be sued?  And that the Internet Tax
Moratorium repealed sales taxes?  And the revenue lost to the Bush tax
cuts amount to "*more* than enough to fund Social Security and
Medicare for 75 years"?

Do you believe that *any* of these or the other claims you snipped
that Krugman made are true?  

BTW, Antler points out today that Krugman was a whole lot less
concerned about even larger deficits than our currently projected ones
that were looking to last forever when he wrote _ Age of Diminished
Expectations_
http://www.econopundit.com/archive/2003_10_01_econopundit_archive.html#106643574444570541

But I guess PK wasn't reading The Economist back then. ;-)