03 Apr 2010


Economics, Health Legislation 2 Comments

…though it pains me. But c’mon guys, we don’t need to put words into Krugman’s mouth like this:

Krugman was NOT admitting there would be death panels. We can say he’s a naive fool for thinking we’ll limit the “advisory panels” (that can make binding decisions) to truly eradicating only ineffective treatments–and let’s leave aside the philosophical issue of what qualifies as an effective treatment–but he didn’t say there would be death panels.

All Krugman was saying was that it was inconsistent for Republicans to claim there would be death panels AND that ObamaCare would lead to escalating costs. In other words, if the Republicans are right and old people go sleepy time once they get too expensive, then shouldn’t ObamaCare limit medical expenses?

Note that I’m not even saying Krugman’s argument is valid, even insofar as it goes: I actually think we will see both escalating costs AND arbitrary government meddling to limit treatments as a way to contain the exploding deficits. But no matter what, you can’t say, “That lying Krugman now admits there will be death panels, after denying them so vigorously during the debate.”

Last point: If you think it’s fine to say that of Krugman, because it’s “basically” what he’s saying, or “close enough and in the end it’s what will happen so he should know better,” then congratulations because now you know how Paul Krugman views conservatives (and Austrian economists).

2 Responses to “Must…Defend…Krugman…”

  1. Sean A says:

    Admirable; clearly you’re not a politician like other “economists” out there; I had a relevant example in mind, but I can’t think of his name….
    It is not political rhetoric that will push the Austrian movement forward; logic and knowledge, once properly understood, speak for themselves. The world has more outlets than ever to provide means to understanding. These tools and no other can bring Austrian Economics and libertarianism to be accepted and enacted, without being manipulated by damning capitulations and compromises inherent in the political sphere. Last thing I would want to see is war mongers start calling themselves Austrians (not of the Schwarzenegger variety)…….. Oh, Paul Krugman was the name of the “economist” I was thinking of.

  2. LvMIenthusiast says:

    Savage, Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin, and the rest of the “Conservative” screwballs are really starting to get on my nerves these days. Especially because of the fact that my father amongst others, buys into their bullshit on a daily basis. We always get into arguments and he’s always highly dismissive of my Austro-Libertarian ways. He calls me “cocky” and “arrogant” because I strongly disagree with him on these matters. He keeps trying to tell me that Libertarians are respectable with their views on economics, but have no grasp of reality when it comes to politics (he doesn’t seem to realize that they go hand in hand with each other).

    I’ve urged him to take the course on the ABCT on Mises Academy or at least read up on it if nothing else. But he says Austrian economics is “basic economics, 1+1=2” and there’s no need to pursue it further (although he thought flipping houses was a sustainable and profitable venture).

    While I think exposure and education are the two most important tools when it comes to AE and Libertarianism, I’m begining to believe that well, some people can’t be convinced and need to be left alone.

    Needless to say, I will continue to be relentless and uncompromising when it comes to my father. It just pisses me off that such an educated man could succumb to such fallacy riddled and jingoistic garbage.

    Any advice Mr. Murphy?