14 Sep 2011

Murphy on Woods on Schiff

Shameless Self-Promotion 19 Comments

This is like Mozart grilling burgers, but anyway here is Tom Woods (bestselling PhD intellectual who went to Harvard) being an angry guy on the radio. He starts in with the completely over-the-top introduction around the 18:00 mark.

19 Responses to “Murphy on Woods on Schiff”

  1. Zack A says:

    Great job bob as always. I love hearing woods try to play devils advocate. Only concern I have is this: you’re saying WWII is the only historical anecdote keynesians can use? I think you’re giving them far to much credit on that..

    How about schiff going head to head with karl smith? boy, that was interesting!

    I like when schiff asks Smith (toward the end), “when does inflation stop being good, and start being bad?”

    Check it out folks: http://schiffradio.com/

    Go to the Karl Smith Interview

  2. Jack says:

    Tom Woods needs his own radio show. I could listen to him talk for hours.

    • Jack says:

      Oh and uh, you did a great job too Bob!

  3. Zack A says:

    On a side note, looks like the great MMT guru Mike Norman doesn’t like Peter Schiff testimony yesterday on Capitol Hill. Who knew? Of course, Schiff gives an Austrian style run down on how the stimulus will hurt the economy and on how to really create jobs and growth. So naturally, it makes MMT’ers sick to their stomach to hear how their proposals are really the cause of our problems.

    http://mikenormaneconomics.blogspot.com/2011/09/peter-schiffs-job-creation-proposals.html

    This Norman guy is really out there, I mean REALLY out there. He says stuff so ridiculous at times I’m almost compelled to comment, but I would probably be gang banged by swaths of MMT loons who have no understand of free markets or Austrian theory.

    I guess our only hope is to have the “great” Warren Mosler testify and enlighten our wise overlords about the “glory” of MMT and how operationally unconstrained they are in printing and spending money? As if they already didn’t know that? We can only hope.

    What do the rest of you folks think of this Norman guy? (we already know AP and Mamouth think hes a “brilliant” economist)

    • MamMoTh says:

      Economists aren’t brilliant. Otherwise they would have done something more useful with their life than studying economics. They are just not dumb enough to become attorneys.

      • bobmurphy says:

        Mathematicians are people who were too dumb to be physicists and too smart to be economists.

        • Secret Agent says:

          Accountants are too dumb to be economists and too smart to be MMTers.

    • Bala says:

      Thanks for the link. I really split my sides laughing.

      • MamMoTh says:

        That’s what happens to me when I read this blog.
        Hope you now can understand why I need to keep visiting it.

        • Bala says:

          I don’t know about you, but I definitely need you here because you too help me split my sides laughing every time I read your comments. Incidentally, that teeny weeny discussion on the economic consequences of increases in the money supply is pending. It has been reopened at the bottom of that thread. Care to stop evading and instead address the question posed?

          • MamMoTh says:

            I will do whatever I consider necessary to provoke more hilarious comments like yours.

            • Bala says:

              You do what you want to. Meanwhile, how about stopping the evasion?

    • Bob Roddis says:

      MMTers don’t even have an economic theory other than the crudest dumbest Keynesian aggregate demand nonsense. Read these Mitchell and Wray/Kelton articles recommended by the Imperious Lord “Wage and Price Controls” Keynes:

      http://socialdemocracy21stcentury.blogspot.com/2011/09/some-reaction-to-obamas-new-stimulus.html

      Wray and Kelton apparently invented modern MMT. It’s no coincidence that Abba Lerner’s big book is RED and is called “The Economics of Control”.

    • DudeWhere'sMySavings says:

      Zack,
      I’ve posted here before about Mike Norman. There’s even a Mike Norman Was Right tribute video on youtube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jpOpzSwJ60 I mean, the idiot works for a boiler-room brokerage firm called John Thomas Financial. Now ponder on that name for a minute. John Thomas Finanical, when I first read it, I thought it was a parody porn name. Between that and the youtube clip, you should be in splits by now.
      I propose a Mike Norman Stimulus Program. We’ll put him in a glass cage and invite people to point and laugh at him, of course for a fee, and donate the proceeds to the Mike Norman Retirement Trust. This idiot and everyone who foolishly listened to him are probably dead broke by now. The guy has completely lost it. For kicks, just visit his youtube channel http://www.youtube.com/user/mikeydoggy I went there for the “wisdom” but stayed for the comments. They are so absolutely hilarious that Norman deleted and then disabled them. There are still some with comments, so enjoy while you can.
      What’s Mike Norman good for if not for a few laughs on his sorry-ass account.

  4. Kyle says:

    Tom Woods did an online question and answer session for the Freedom Festival a month or so ago. I asked him if he is going to have his own show. He replied that it is in the works and he loves guest hosting. Fingers crossed for another voice of liberty out there.

  5. get_a_pickle says:

    Bob, can you list off some of the successful austerity programs for us? I’m always inclined to agree with you, but it would be nice to have some more examples to point out to friends. ;) In the same vein, is there anywhere can one find data on the length and severity recessions prior to highly-interventionist governments?

  6. Jeremy says:

    I was reading back through the links at the debate page. In “The Hangover Theory” Krugman has a very interesting comment:

    “And in fact the key to the Keynesian revolution in economic thought—a revolution that made hangover theory in general and Austrian theory in particular as obsolete as epicycles”

    Odd that he mentions epicycles. The story here is that to make their model of the universe match what was observed they had to do unimaginably difficult and long calculations. The orbit of Mars for example seems to do loops in the night sky, easily explained with the Sun in the center but requires serous mathematical tinkering to explain it with the Earth at the center. Their “models” predicted the movement accurately, but obviously completely wrong.

    What’s the difference between them and most of the modern economics profession?