Go Back   Bloggingheads Community > Diavlog comments
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Diavlog comments Post comments about particular diavlogs here.
(Users cannot create new threads.)

Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 09-05-2011, 03:57 AM
sugarkang sugarkang is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Cali, Small-Govt Liberal
Posts: 2,186
Default Re: Booze and Money (Tim Fernholz & Megan McArdle)

Originally Posted by Parallax View Post
Actually I use Median CPI as inflation measure. But do you have a better gauge of inflation? As long as there isn't any that point is moot.
An updated CPI has been suggested, but is not used. I don't know why that would make the point moot. I think that's fairly critical when saying something like inflation hasn't moved for 30 years. Even if you don't want to track dollars to gold because gold is in a bubble, you can still measure against platinum. Inflation is real; CPI is an illusion.

I am not Paul Krugman (although I would fancy a nobel prize and a job at Princeton) so saying he wanted a housing bubble seems irrelevant to our current discussion.
Krugman is relevant because he and all Keynesians have been repeating the same mantra. I'm not saying he's wrong. What I'm saying is that there are other smart people who say we ought not be so sure. I agree, however, that we have a demand problem. This could also be fixed by letting house prices plunge like they're supposed to.

You know that I am calling for easy money, right? No economist except the goldbugs is against easier monetary policy right now.
Yes, and I skeptically support this plan.

Fiscal expansion has more opponents and is more controversial but fiscal policy was not mentioned in the diavlog (if it was mentioned it was quite brief compared to the discussion on Fed and monetary policy).
Yes. Nothing is shovel ready.

I did not have time to listen to this so I am not sure what part of what I said is being contradicted. Also Selgin is one of the anti-Fed goldbugs I was referring to and my general rule is to ignore people who are for abolishing Fed.
At BBC4, those were economists at the debate. I'd like to know your reasons for dismissing Hayekians and extending credibility to Keynesians.

Finally I would like to add that Hayek would favor substantial easing from Fed right now.
I'm not so sure after the manufacture of an artificial housing bubble. That was the easing.

And you can go back and watch De Long - Lindsay diavlog to make sure but if Fed was targeting NGDP it had to engage in extensive easing ( more than 200 billon asset purchases a month every month until unemployment came below a target like 7.5%).
But we were talking Sumner. France has a generous welfare state and they've been at 9-12% unemployment for a quarter century. Sumner acknowledges the demand problem. After easing, what if unemployment stays high? Because I'm betting it will.

US on the other hand has a debt to GDP ratio of 70%.
Our debt is closer to 100% of GDP if counting intragovernmental holdings. Could you tell me why it's okay to ignore $4.5 trillion?
The mixing of populations lowers the cost of being unusual.

Last edited by sugarkang; 09-05-2011 at 04:00 AM..
Reply With Quote

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:37 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.