05 Aug 2013


DeLong, Krugman, Potpourri, Shameless Self-Promotion 31 Comments

==> You may think this upcoming Mises Academy class, “Delusions of Krugman,” is taught by me, but nope. I am much kinder and gentler than Bill Anderson.

==> A good summary at Reason on the social cost of carbon.

==> When I was at the Senate testifying, OMB rep Shelanski was at the House, saying the opposite. Here’s my parsing of his testimony on the social cost of carbon.

==> Until last week, I had somehow gone my whole life without seeing Hayek on Milton Friedman the Keynesian (on methodology).

==> Just a warning, if you are against ObamaCare, make sure you don’t give your friend money to help with his medical bills, lest Brad DeLong take you to the woodshed.

31 Responses to “Potpourri”

  1. NoGodsOrKings says:

    “Delusions Of Krugman”

    Isn’t this just feeding the beast? If Krugman were to see such a title, he automatically knows he’s won. He gets to feel like the learned mainstream economist besieged by heretics, which is exactly the response he probably wants to provoke from the low-social-status right-libertarians whose approval he isn’t after.

    His supporters will respond to this in much the same way ‘our side’ responded to Michael Lind’s anti-libertarian articles – with dismissal. The confrontational tone immediately immunizes potential marginal converts against any reasonable arguments contained within the presentation.

    The only people likely to respond positively is the Austrian base, which doesn’t need any further reinforcement. I think we can do better than this.

    Consider: “The God Delusion” may have had some good arguments, but it probably didn’t convert many people. It mainly served to make existing atheists worse people.

    • Daniel Kuehn says:

      Yes, but $10 per person times the hoards that will flock to this crap (assuming he’s just reproducing material from his blog) is a nice return on an hour and a half.

      • skylien says:

        At least as a Keynesian you should appreciate the demand and income this course is creating, no matter the underlying value created by it, right?


        • Richie says:

          No, no, see, as a Keynesian, he must decide where the demand and income are created. The peons can’t decide for themselves. Only the anointed masters get to decided. Therefore, criticizing Krugman, the god-like figure in his Keynesian universe, is blasphemy. It’s “crap.”

      • Bob Roddis says:

        “Hoards” are stashes of savings by the oblivious and ignorant peons who require compulsory investment guidance by their Keynesian betters. Like you.


        “Hordes” are large groups of such oblivious and ignorant peons who might sign up for Prof. Anderson’s course.

        And how about an essay on what’s wrong with Prof. Anderson’s blog. Hmmm?

    • Razer says:

      Freedom has no central plan.

  2. Dan says:

    DeLong is the worst.

  3. Major_Freedom says:

    The woodshed?

    More like the sandbox.

  4. Casual Reader says:

    Apologies beforehand for what I’m going to say because I consider myself a well educated person…

    …but honestly, Brad DeLong is just, plain and simple, retarded.

  5. Ken B says:

    My conscience comples me to reveal this note I received from Daniel Kuehn, which might clarify these issues.

    My minions Paul Krugman and Scott Sumner have been at work muddying issues, confusing voters, weakening resolve,
    and our scheme approaches fruition; soon the currency will be as deauched as a bonobo threesome.
    (Speaking of my minions, I am pleased to see the Austrians still think Krugman, not I, is the master manipulator, the man behind the curtain.
    All could go still go wrong if they ever figure this out, but happily Austrians misundertand the fundamental idea of economist calculation.)

    My plan to carpet bomb Dallas proceeds apace. We will use a brown acryllic shag with decorative fringes. That’ll learn them not to unfriend me on Facebook.

    Only one challenge remains: to sideline Murphy until it is too late.
    This is where I need your help Ken B.
    We have carefully prepared the groundwork, planting the absurd notion of natural selection in textbooks and science classes, decades in advance, in case we had need of such a distraction.
    Now is that hour of need: go onto his blog and present some absurd argument about recurrent laryngeal nerves or mammalian choking hazards. As if those weren’t features, rather than bugs!

    Daniel Kuehn

  6. Blackadder says:

    I actually thought that Brad DeLong post was pretty reasonable. I’m sure that looking back on it, Caleb Howe regrets making those tweets and is glad other people aren’t treating him the same way.

    • Matt Tanous says:

      “I actually thought that Brad DeLong post was pretty reasonable”

      Well, except for the whole “true charity isn’t voluntarily helping people but forcibly stealing from all your neighbors to pay for a third parties needs” bit.

      • Blackadder says:


        If you read the Bible passage DeLong quotes, it says that true charity is helping people who hate and curse you, rather than just helping your friends. That was DeLong’s point. If there’s anything in their about stealing from your neighbor I missed it.

        • Ken B says:

          Umm, you’ve missed the point here. DeLong is likening support for Obamacare with charity and Matt is pointing out a difference.

          DeLong is essentially saying “well a charitable person would support Obamacare and if you oppose it it’s because you are selfish.”

          • Blackadder says:

            DeLong is essentially saying “well a charitable person would support Obamacare and if you oppose it it’s because you are selfish.”

            Nope. What he’s saying is that a charitable person would give to help Caleb even though he’s an asshole.

            • Ken B says:

              That doesn’t make much sense as the guy is described as an obamcare opponent. That is either an irrelevant detail or part of DeLongs point. Since he mentions it twice, once in caps, my money is on the latter.

            • Matt Tanous says:

              Then why criticize Klein, who is evidently only asking for donations to help a friend? Why bring up that Klein is not an Obamacare supporter?

              What does support for Obamacare have to do with charity?

    • Bob Murphy says:

      Blackadder, is your mission in life to vex me? Because you deserve a raise, if so.

      Yes, the story is more interesting in that that Caleb Howe wrote some awful stuff. (I’m assuming it’s the same guy, right?)

      But DeLong’s title was about the fact that a guy who opposes ObamaCare, urges his Twitter followers to donate money to his friend. Then, DeLong says “And there’s this” meaning, “This is a separate point.”

      Now maybe DeLong wouldn’t have bothered blogging it, were it not for the inflammatory Howe tweets; we can’t know. But he was definitely making his post about the first guy, that’s why he picked the title. He didn’t say, “Irony strikes! Caleb Howe now sees what it’s like” or something.

      • Blackadder says:

        Blackadder, is your mission in life to vex me? Because you deserve a raise, if so.

        Well, George Soros does pay me a nickle for every critical comment I leave here. A few more months and I’ll be able to afford that second beach house.

        For context: 1) I’ve seen a lot of folks be really obnoxious about this Klein tweet, and 2) I’ve read enough of Brad DeLong to know what he is capable of. So when I clicked on the link I was expecting something spectacular.

        Instead I found some shocking quotes from Howe, and a reaction from DeLong that was surprisingly restrained. It even had a Christian message about loving one’s enemies. Given that DeLong’s typical MO is to respond to typoes by declaring someone the most evil man alive, that was also surprising.

      • Blackadder says:


        Let me add one other thing. I’ve found that I’m much more likely to leave a comment on one of your posts that I disagree with than on one where I agree completely. That’s not because Soros is paying me (although the money is nice) as it is that when I agree with a post of yours I often feel like I don’t have much to add. I think you do a lot of great work, and I wouldn’t want anyone to get a contrary impression just from looking at my comments.

        • Bob Murphy says:

          BTW Blackadder I was mostly being “funny” with that. Tone of voice doesn’t come off well online. (Ken B., in contrast, truly does annoy me…)

          • Ken B says:

            It’s a gift.

          • Blackadder says:


            Glad to hear it. I would hate for anything to come between our digital bromance.

            • Bob Murphy says:


              Glad to hear it. I would hate for anything to come between our digital bromance.

              I’d sooner start a family with Baldrick. (Blackadder reference)

  7. joe says:

    Too bad you can’t make money explaining why Schiff is delusional. That’s like offering a lecture on why 2+2 = 4.

    • skylien says:

      Well, you could propose a tax to finance such a lecture or just finance it via deficit spending. Missing demand from irrational guidance-seeking private people should not really bother you…

  8. Ken Pruitt says:

    I don’t know about the specifics of the so-called “Social” cost of carbon (would someone please explain to me, in terms I can understand, what in the hell a “Social” cost is supposed to be? That sounds vague as all get out), but I do know that there are people out there who’re now calling for the entire energy industry to be nationalized. I dealt with one such person here recently.


Leave a Reply