Bitcoin Forum
December 08, 2016, 08:23:01 AM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Nobel economist Krugman on bitcoin and crypto-currencies.  (Read 9851 times)
marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2100



View Profile
May 27, 2011, 02:06:10 PM
 #1


""

1481185381
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481185381

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481185381
Reply with quote  #2

1481185381
Report to moderator
1481185381
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481185381

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481185381
Reply with quote  #2

1481185381
Report to moderator
1481185381
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481185381

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481185381
Reply with quote  #2

1481185381
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481185381
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481185381

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481185381
Reply with quote  #2

1481185381
Report to moderator
molecular
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2142



View Profile
May 27, 2011, 02:29:52 PM
 #2


""

So, Krugman didn't say anyting?

PGP key molecular F9B70769 fingerprint 9CDD C0D3 20F8 279F 6BE0  3F39 FC49 2362 F9B7 0769
Malamute
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2


View Profile
May 27, 2011, 03:56:31 PM
 #3


Even if he did, it's as good as saying nothing. The guy is a Keynesian sham economist.
kjj
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302



View Profile
May 27, 2011, 04:10:27 PM
 #4

Hmm.  Krugman isn't usually this eloquent.  Not usually this brief either.  I think that quote is from an impostor.

p2pcoin: a USB/CD/PXE p2pool miner - 1N8ZXx2cuMzqBYSK72X4DAy1UdDbZQNPLf - todo
I routinely ignore posters with paid advertising in their sigs.  You should too.
DrSammyD
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 49


View Profile
May 27, 2011, 04:45:09 PM
 #5


orthzar
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 6


View Profile
May 27, 2011, 04:51:56 PM
 #6

Hmmm, it sounds like Krugman was able to keep his opinion short and concise this time.   So is "" logically consistent?

Joking aside, I would very much like to hear about Krugman's opinion on Bitcoin.   The title of this thread is comparable to the time I heard the Bitcoin.org founder was going to meet with the CIA (or whoever) to talk specifically about Bitcoin; I have no other info on the meeting with CIA nor its accuracy.
goatpig
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330

Armory Developer


View Profile
May 27, 2011, 04:58:49 PM
 #7

Hmmm, it sounds like Krugman was able to keep his opinion short and concise this time.   So is "" logically consistent?

Joking aside, I would very much like to hear about Krugman's opinion on Bitcoin.   The title of this thread is comparable to the time I heard the Bitcoin.org founder was going to meet with the CIA (or whoever) to talk specifically about Bitcoin; I have no other info on the meeting with CIA nor its accuracy.

http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=6652.msg97181#msg97181

You talking about this?

btcarmory.com
jon_smark
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 90


View Profile
May 27, 2011, 08:32:12 PM
 #8

I, for one, am very much curious about what Krugman would say about the economic aspects of Bitcoin.

And by the way, why all the disdain for Krugman expressed in this thread?  As far as mainstream economists go, I have the utmost respect for him.  He has been consistently been correct on his predictions and he has always been coherent with his arguments.  Case in point: he clamored against the irresponsible build up of the deficit during the Bush years, because the Keynesian doctrine argues (correctly in my view) that during the "good times" one is supposed to reduce the debt so that a larger margin of maneuver is gained for increasing government spending during the "bad times".  Remember that many other economists (Greenspan et al) were actually against having a government surplus and cheered on the irresponsible Bush tax cuts.

Another point of reflection for this forum's hivemind: despite goldbugs having for many years been constantly raving about hyper-inflation, the fact is the US continues to have a rate of inflation that is extremely low by historical standards.  A rate so low that deflation is actually a bigger worry.  This is exactly the sort of outcome that Krugman predicted given the liquidity trap situation the US found itself in after the 2008 crisis.
kiba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


View Profile
May 27, 2011, 08:35:34 PM
 #9

The problem with economists is that they have no way conduct scientific experiment on monetary policies. Yes, there are data, but interpretation is everything.

Economists can have interpretations that fit the data but it turns out to be bollock.

error
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 574



View Profile
May 27, 2011, 08:43:26 PM
 #10

USD inflation is extremely low? What parallel universe are you in?

15UFyv6kfWgq83Pp3yhXPr8rknv9m6581W
Cusipzzz
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 300


View Profile
May 27, 2011, 08:46:59 PM
 #11

Krugman's opinion would be similar to Cowen's or any of the other mainstream guys who refuse to think it is viable:

a wise man once said, "It is difficult for a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it."

http://BTCSportsBet.com - The most complete bitcoin Sportsbook - All games from pro and college sports, Champions League, E-Sports, and reduced juice as well!
kiba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


View Profile
May 27, 2011, 08:49:59 PM
 #12

Krugman's opinion would be similar to Cowen's or any of the other mainstream guys who refuse to think it is viable:

a wise man once said, "It is difficult for a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it."

Refusal to understand means they lose out on bitcoin.

MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666



View Profile
May 27, 2011, 08:50:40 PM
 #13

I, for one, am very much curious about what Krugman would say about the economic aspects of Bitcoin.

And by the way, why all the disdain for Krugman expressed in this thread?  As far as mainstream economists go, I have the utmost respect for him.  He has been consistently been correct on his predictions and he has always been coherent with his arguments.

LOL!  What nonsense!  There has been numerous articles from real economists pointing out Krugman's poor prediction record!  One I've seen actually demonstrated how Krugman is only slightly better than throwing darts at a dartboard blindfolded.  If you want to see an economist with a real track record for accuracy, try Mish (http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/)  Peter Schiff (http://www.europac.net/) or Rich Maybury (http://chaostan.com/).  All of these guys actually make money, real fortunes, based upon their predictions.  Krugman makes money selling advice to readers of the NYT.  He's the economic version of "ask Nancy".

If you are taking your advice from someone who doesn't make a living from his own advice, you are an idiot.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
jon_smark
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 90


View Profile
May 27, 2011, 08:51:19 PM
 #14

USD inflation is extremely low? What parallel universe are you in?

Must be that "crazy" parallel universe that relies on hard data instead of conspiracy theories.
Check out the stats from the OECD and verify for yourself.
error
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 574



View Profile
May 27, 2011, 08:53:51 PM
 #15

USD inflation is extremely low? What parallel universe are you in?

Must be that "crazy" parallel universe that relies on hard data instead of conspiracy theories.
Check out the stats from the OECD and verify for yourself.

You didn't link to any stats, just a web site which may or may not contain stats somewhere, and when the stats are eventually located, may or may not be valid.

15UFyv6kfWgq83Pp3yhXPr8rknv9m6581W
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666



View Profile
May 27, 2011, 08:55:18 PM
 #16

USD inflation is extremely low? What parallel universe are you in?

Must be that "crazy" parallel universe that relies on hard data instead of conspiracy theories.
Check out the stats from the OECD and verify for yourself.


This depends entirely on how one defines inflation.  I didn't bother reading your link, but IIRC the OECD defines inflation as the general rise in consumer prices.  This is not how anyone with an Austrian Economic Theory perspective would define it, nor is it how the majority of economists define it.  That metric is only how governments that print money define it.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
jon_smark
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 90


View Profile
May 27, 2011, 09:01:46 PM
 #17

The problem with economists is that they have no way conduct scientific experiment on monetary policies. Yes, there are data, but interpretation is everything.

Economists can have interpretations that fit the data but it turns out to be bollock.

Yes, Economists may not like to hear this, but Economics is at best a proto-science. Beside the practical difficulty of performing controlled experiments with economic policies (as you pointed out), there's also the problem that Economics is not yet grounded on any meaningful substrate in the "great stack of science".  Unlike Chemistry, for instance, which is firmly grounded on the Physics substrate.

Nevertheless, my opinion is that when eventually Economics does become a science it is more likely to resemble Keynesianism than the Austrian school so favoured by this forum's hivemind.
BitterTea
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 294



View Profile
May 27, 2011, 09:07:15 PM
 #18

I, for one, am very much curious about what Krugman would say about the economic aspects of Bitcoin.

And by the way, why all the disdain for Krugman expressed in this thread?  As far as mainstream economists go, I have the utmost respect for him.  He has been consistently been correct on his predictions and he has always been coherent with his arguments.

LOL!  What nonsense!  There has been numerous articles from real economists pointing out Krugman's poor prediction record!  One I've seen actually demonstrated how Krugman is only slightly better than throwing darts at a dartboard blindfolded.  If you want to see an economist with a real track record for accuracy, try Mish (http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/)  Peter Schiff (http://www.europac.net/) or Rich Maybury (http://chaostan.com/).  All of these guys actually make money, real fortunes, based upon their predictions.  Krugman makes money selling advice to readers of the NYT.  He's the economic version of "ask Nancy".

If you are taking your advice from someone who doesn't make a living from his own advice, you are an idiot.

I've been trying to find the article where someone points out all of the times that Krugman has been wrong about the financial crisis and changed his position afterward. Unfortunately I cannot find it. Sad

Here's one: http://mises.org/daily/3530
Bazil
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 126


View Profile
May 27, 2011, 09:14:47 PM
 #19

USD inflation is extremely low? What parallel universe are you in?

Must be that "crazy" parallel universe that relies on hard data instead of conspiracy theories.
Check out the stats from the OECD and verify for yourself.


Their charts are flawed because they decided to remove volatile items like gas and food back in the 80ies.  That way inflation would always paint a rosier picture.  Gas and food inflation is in the double digit range right now.  I'll tell you my wallet feels the inflation, even if the "experts" don't think there is any.

17Bo9a6YpXN2SbwY8mXLCD43Wup9ZE4rwm
MoonShadow
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1666



View Profile
May 27, 2011, 09:17:34 PM
 #20

The problem with economists is that they have no way conduct scientific experiment on monetary policies. Yes, there are data, but interpretation is everything.

Economists can have interpretations that fit the data but it turns out to be bollock.

Yes, Economists may not like to hear this, but Economics is at best a proto-science. Beside the practical difficulty of performing controlled experiments with economic policies (as you pointed out), there's also the problem that Economics is not yet grounded on any meaningful substrate in the "great stack of science".  Unlike Chemistry, for instance, which is firmly grounded on the Physics substrate.

Nevertheless, my opinion is that when eventually Economics does become a science it is more likely to resemble Keynesianism than the Austrian school so favoured by this forum's hivemind.


Ah, no.  Economics is, indeed, a science.  It's just that it's not that kind of science.  It's a social science, not a physical science.  As such, it's laws are based on how humans act, and therefore how they think.  Hence the name of the Austrian classic, Human Action.  Anyone who trys to tell you that mathmatical formulas can be derived from the economic data, or that the laws of economics drive the public and not the other way around, (*cough* Keynes *cough*) is full of crap.  Economics is the "dismal science" because it's a social science.  Physics is easy, your experiments (above quantum) are not affected by observations.  Humans don't act that way, they respond differently to the same stimuli, and moreso when they are aware that they are the experiment.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."

- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
Pages: [1] 2 3 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!