Krugman's columns in the NYT, & The General Theory will all end...

Krugman's columns in the NYT, & The General Theory will all end up in the trashcan of history, and people will look back and wonder how could people be so stupid for believing such against-common-sense nonsense (I mean do you really think printing money produces actual wealth, that consumption precedes production, that the theory whereby you pay people to dig ditches & other people to fill them in (thus producing jobs but no net wealth) is sensible, and most importantly, that tinkering with interest rates actually produces efficient allocation of capital?)

Also note that the US has the reserve currency and thus in effect can export (temporarily) much of the consequences of inflationary monetary policy.

As for the Schiff-attack article, here are a couple of nice replies from Bob Wenzel of EPJ.

Short (reproduced below)
http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2012/11/the-ultimate-totally-over-top-paul.html

Bit more in depth re economic theory (worth a read, follow the link)
http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2012/11/paul-krugman-displaying-basic-ignorance.html


The Ultimate Totally Over-the-Top Paul Krugman Attack on Peter Schiff

Paul Krugman has really flipped. He says Peter Schiff didn't warn about the housing bubble:

Some readers may recall the “Peter Schiff was right” campaign of 2009, a sort of public-relations blitz claiming that Schiff, an Austrian-oriented commentator, had foreseen everything correctly. It wasn’t really true even then...
Krugman goes on to discuss Schiff's warning on price inflation---and that we haven't had the expected inflation, yet. It's coming and Schiff will be correct again--exact timing is always difficult in a complex world.

But I really want to focus on Krugman's whopper about Schiff not calling the housing bubble, becasue that's what he is talking about when he refers to the " 'Peter Schiff was right' campaign of 2009."

Here's the clip Krugman is referring to, which appeared in February 2009:

It simply astounding that Krugman would make up such a whopper when the video proof smacks him right in the face, particularly when he is clearly referencing the video. Does he really think his NYT readers are that clueless?