Paul Krugman talks Ron Paul in latest column

[Agorism]

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/18/springtime-for-hypocrites


In a way, I almost welcome the frankness of someone like Ron Paul, who tells us that there’s no need for any kind of bank regulations. It’s crazy, of course — even Adam Smith called for bank regulations, comparing them to building regulations designed to prevent the spread of fires. But at least the guy’s consistent.

[Matt Collins]

If a tree falls in a forest, does anyone care?

[TNforPaul45]

"In a way, I almost welcome the existence of someone like Paul Krugman, who tells us that the Fed knows best and that we should just hand over our money quietly, trusting all the time, to the bankers. It's crazy, of course - even Thomas Jefferson called for there to be no central banks, comparing them to invading armies that will take away the production of our fathers. But at least the asshole is consistent."

[ClayTrainor]

Ron Paul is for real regulations. He's all for regulating against things like Fraud, Coercion and Theft.

Kroogman supports the use of fraud, coercion and theft and calls them things like "regulation" and "stimulus".

[Anti Federalist]

"In a way, I almost welcome the existence of someone like Paul Krugman, who tells us that the Fed knows best and that we should just hand over our money quietly, trusting all the time, to the bankers. It's crazy, of course - even Thomas Jefferson called for there to be no central banks, comparing them to invading armies that will take away the production of our fathers. But at least the asshole is consistent."

Win.

+rep

[Agorism]

Paul is talking about small banks not needing regulation I believe.

The FED itself needs heavy regulation even abolishment.

[Adolfo Mena Gonzalez]

If anything, deregulation prohibited an even worse crisis. To Clinton's credit, he support the repeal of Glass Steagall which allowed banks to diversify their assets and engage in both Commercial and Investment Banking. Banks like JP Morgan Chase weathered the financial crisis fairly well, because they were able to engage in mergers and diversify their assets due to the repeal of the Glass Stegall legislation, where as Investment Banks like Lehman Brothers and Bear Sterns invested almost exclusively in subprime mortgages went bankrupt.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/who_caused_the_economic_crisis.html

[Agorism]

If anything, deregulation prohibited an even worse crisis. To Clinton's credit, he support the repeal of Glass Steagall which allowed banks to diversify their assets and engage in both Commercial and Investment Banking. Banks like JP Morgan Chase weathered the financial crisis fairly well, because they were able to engage in mergers and diversify their assets due to the repeal of the Glass Stegall legislation, where as Investment Banks like Lehman Brothers and Bear Sterns invested almost exclusively in subprime mortgages went bankrupt.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/who_caused_the_economic_crisis.html

Ron Paul opposed the repeal of Glass Steagall.

He is for open banking or at a minimum as a compromise closed banking but not fractional reserve banking. Anything that allows increased leverage with a guarantee of government backing is bad. Of course government backing is basically guaranteed\implied no matter what...that's why leverage is so dangerous under this system.

[low preference guy]

In a way, I almost welcome the frankness of someone like Ron Paul, who tells us that there’s no need for any kind of bank regulations. It’s crazy, of course — even Adam Smith called for bank regulations, comparing them to building regulations designed to prevent the spread of fires. But at least the guy’s consistent.

He "almost" welcomes the frankness of Ron.. he doesn't welcome it. krugman got really close to not being an asshole, but yet didn't make it.

[libertybrewcity]

If a tree falls in a forest, does anyone care?

lots of people care and take his word as truth...unfortunately.

[TNforPaul45]

http://i53.tinypic.com/xglmib.jpg

[Agorism]

LRC: Ron Paul Was Right About “Deregulation” in 1999, Too (http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/23595.html)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCPg8fDYq_Q

[freshjiva]

The only bank that needs some heavy regulating is the central bank.

If we really had a true free market, market participants would create efficient modes of regulation. No central government needed.

[t0rnado]

Skip to 4:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWe3jyqRo-4

[Sola_Fide]

"In a way, I almost welcome the existence of someone like Paul Krugman, who tells us that the Fed knows best and that we should just hand over our money quietly, trusting all the time, to the bankers. It's crazy, of course - even Thomas Jefferson called for there to be no central banks, comparing them to invading armies that will take away the production of our fathers. But at least the asshole is consistent."


/end thread

[Corydoras]

Krugman's creative editing is infuriating. What Ron Paul basically said, as I understood it, is that there need to be firm laws that are enforced, rather than bureaucrats making regulations and cutting deals with individual corporations to bend the rules to help a company survive when the market should be killing it.


“I don’t think we need regulators. We need law and order. We need people to fulfill their contracts,” Paul said.
The congressman said that the market should play the main role in regulation. “The market is a great regulator, and we’ve lost understanding and confidence that the market is probably a much stricter regulator,” he said.

[crazyfacedjenkins]

Fannie and Freddie

by Rep. Ron Paul, MD

Ron Paul in the House Financial Services Committee, September 10, 2003

Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing on the Treasury Department's views regarding government sponsored enterprises (GSEs). I would also like to thank Secretaries Snow and Martinez for taking time out of their busy schedules to appear before the committee.

I hope this committee spends some time examining the special privileges provided to GSEs by the federal government. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the housing-related GSEs received $13.6 billion worth of indirect federal subsidies in fiscal year 2000 alone. Today, I will introduce the Free Housing Market Enhancement Act, which removes government subsidies from the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac), and the National Home Loan Bank Board.

One of the major government privileges granted to GSEs is a line of credit with the United States Treasury. According to some estimates, the line of credit may be worth over $2 billion. This explicit promise by the Treasury to bail out GSEs in times of economic difficulty helps the GSEs attract investors who are willing to settle for lower yields than they would demand in the absence of the subsidy. Thus, the line of credit distorts the allocation of capital. More importantly, the line of credit is a promise on behalf of the government to engage in a huge unconstitutional and immoral income transfer from working Americans to holders of GSE debt.

The Free Housing Market Enhancement Act also repeals the explicit grant of legal authority given to the Federal Reserve to purchase GSE debt. GSEs are the only institutions besides the United States Treasury granted explicit statutory authority to monetize their debt through the Federal Reserve. This provision gives the GSEs a source of liquidity unavailable to their competitors.

The connection between the GSEs and the government helps isolate the GSE management from market discipline. This isolation from market discipline is the root cause of the recent reports of mismanagement occurring at Fannie and Freddie. After all, if Fannie and Freddie were not underwritten by the federal government, investors would demand Fannie and Freddie provide assurance that they follow accepted management and accounting practices.

Ironically, by transferring the risk of a widespread mortgage default, the government increases the likelihood of a painful crash in the housing market. This is because the special privileges granted to Fannie and Freddie have distorted the housing market by allowing them to attract capital they could not attract under pure market conditions. As a result, capital is diverted from its most productive use into housing. This reduces the efficacy of the entire market and thus reduces the standard of living of all Americans.

Despite the long-term damage to the economy inflicted by the government's interference in the housing market, the government's policy of diverting capital to other uses creates a short-term boom in housing. Like all artificially-created bubbles, the boom in housing prices cannot last forever. When housing prices fall, homeowners will experience difficulty as their equity is wiped out. Furthermore, the holders of the mortgage debt will also have a loss. These losses will be greater than they would have otherwise been had government policy not actively encouraged over-investment in housing.

Perhaps the Federal Reserve can stave off the day of reckoning by purchasing GSE debt and pumping liquidity into the housing market, but this cannot hold off the inevitable drop in the housing market forever. In fact, postponing the necessary, but painful market corrections will only deepen the inevitable fall. The more people invested in the market, the greater the effects across the economy when the bubble bursts.

No less an authority than Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has expressed concern that government subsidies provided to GSEs make investors underestimate the risk of investing in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to once again thank the Financial Services Committee for holding this hearing. I would also like to thank Secretaries Snow and Martinez for their presence here today. I hope today's hearing sheds light on how special privileges granted to GSEs distort the housing market and endanger American taxpayers. Congress should act to remove taxpayer support from the housing GSEs before the bubble bursts and taxpayers are once again forced to bail out investors who were misled by foolish government interference in the market. I therefore hope this committee will soon stand up for American taxpayers and investors by acting on my Free Housing Market Enhancement Act.

Dr. Ron Paul is a Republican member of Congress from Texas.

--source (http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul128.html)

[lester1/2jr]

Krugman seems nervous lately. I woud be too considering they have done everything he has recommended and it hasn't work.

[cswake]

Don't you know anything? It's because they haven't spent enough as a % of GDP! /s

[johnrocks]

"In a way, I almost welcome the existence of someone like Paul Krugman, who tells us that the Fed knows best and that we should just hand over our money quietly, trusting all the time, to the bankers. It's crazy, of course - even Thomas Jefferson called for there to be no central banks, comparing them to invading armies that will take away the production of our fathers. But at least the asshole is consistent."

lol...*golf clap*, nail meets atom smasher...or is it in this case "Adam" smasher,lol.

[Inflation]

Krugman. Ha, what maroon.

He's an obsolete laughingstock with zero credibility among the intelligent.

He's this year's Al Gore, another ridiculous, debunked agent of Nobel Prize prestige dilution.

[Bossobass]

As I recall, Ron has never harped about using regulations against the Fed. He has called for an End to the Fed, and in the meanwhile, he's called for a true audit of the Feds books. That's an accounting of their books, where the interest is not in what regulations the Fed may have violated, but what fraudulent, criminal behavior they have engaged in.

Bernie Madoff is in prison for counts of perjury, money laundering and securities, mail and wire fraud.

Krugman gets paid for being one of those guys who loves to hear himself talk, but doesn't care at all what he says... like our current President.

Bosso

[Fox McCloud]

Ron Paul opposed the repeal of Glass Steagall.

He is for open banking or at a minimum as a compromise closed banking but not fractional reserve banking. Anything that allows increased leverage with a guarantee of government backing is bad. Of course government backing is basically guaranteed\implied no matter what...that's why leverage is so dangerous under this system.

This is dishonest (probably unintentionally on your behalf) summary of Ron Paul's position. Ron Paul has mentioned that he would have supported the repeal of Glass-Steagall, but the bill didn't do just that; it repealed it and provided a safety net for banks in the event they engage in risky behavior and lose their hats over it.

[axiomata]

This is dishonest (probably unintentionally on your behalf) summary of Ron Paul's position. Ron Paul has mentioned that he would have supported the repeal of Glass-Steagall, but the bill didn't do just that; it repealed it and provided a safety net for banks in the event they engage in risky behavior and lose their hats over it.

The only regulation that is needed is regulation that attempts to mitigate the negative effect of government intervention. Given the FDIC, Glass Steagall is needed. Repealing Glass Steagal alone is not only not enough, but it actually makes things worse. They both have to be repealed.

[Agorism]

During the Texas senate campaign, Phil Gram was a main proponent of the repeal, and I believe that Paul opposed this at the time.

[cswake]

True. It's also worth pointing out that Paul did recognize the problem with the FDIC, and that GLB Act did nothing to address it (http://www.ronpaularchive.com/1998/05/during-debate-on-the-financial-services-competition-act-of-1997/):


I think this FDIC insurance is something we should be concerned about, but that is a different issue for the moment. I object to that, but I do not believe this will solve the FDIC problem.

[ctiger2]

Ron Paul is for smart regulations. The real problem is we have laws against fraud & theft that aren't being enforced. If someone would just enforce the law, problem solved.

[HOLLYWOOD]

Paul Krugman is there to keep the schemes of the Money Masters going... he's the puppet to balance the growing popularity against the Banking Cabal and the FIAT Monetary system. Krugman is the rigged opposition with a Klan of Keynesians Ducks that follow in a line to his nonsense points.

So sick of Krugman's worthless "Tabloid Economics".

[farrar]

http://i53.tinypic.com/xglmib.jpg

I just thought this deserved a repeat on another page.

[awake]

What would a counterfeiting operation the size of the world do with out intellectual bodyguards.