Who's right Paul Krugman or Ron Paul on the economy?

Question

Paul Krugman is a Professor of Economics at Princeton University. He won a Nobel Prize for his contribution to New Trade Theory and Economic Geography.

Ron Paul is a Libertarian/Republican politician who has been coin as the intellectual godfather of the tea party movement.

Krugman has keysian view of Economics and Paul has an austerity view of Economics, both were interviewed on Bloomberg TV Street Smart in an interview dubbed Paul vs. Paul. Who do you agree with? And why?
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DjEmKIRqz9AI&v=jEmKIRqz9AI&gl=US

Answer 1

Krugman, by a long shot. That's a little like asking who the better scientist was, Einstein or the crazy guy on the city corner ranting about aliens in his teeth. Krugman is, as you mentioned, an economist. Paul is a gynecologist.



The reason actual economists seem to believe in the Keynesian model (which, in the last half-year or so, has been declared "controversial" by people who find science and reality to be harmful to their political model) is because it's about the only thing in the entire field that's been proven by experiment - the Keynesian model was deployed in response to the Great Depression. You'll note that the Great Depression ended.



If you don't have a terribly strong economic background (or a very good eye for distinguishing accomplished experts from blustering crackpots), you might do well to remember that Ron Paul's party is also the party that finds things like biological evolution "controversial." That side of politics is no stranger to making an enemy of science when they find it inconvenient.

Answer 2

Dr. Paul, without doubt, considering that he has been always correct whereas Paul Krugman has been consistently unsuitable. This means that he is either incompetent or a LIAR (i think it is the latter). Which one of them issued dire warnings in 2003 about what used to be coming? Which one was once laughed at by way of mainstream "financial specialists" (like Krugman) for issuing mentioned warnings? In 2008, Krugman appropriately blamed the Gramm Leach Bliley act for the housing bubble and its subsequent crumple. Concern is, he was greater than a day late and a greenback quick on that analysis! The place used to be he in 1999 when Ron Paul used to be all on my own decrying the legislation as a disaster waiting to happen? Only after it turns into obvious and he would lose credibility by using coming to some other conclusion, is Krugman inclined to state what the rest of us already knew. And no, the President does no longer manipulate the worldwide economic climate. The fact that you mentioned that displays rather a lot about your world view. Globalization lies at the core of what precipitated the meltdown in the first place, so the proposal that you simply advocate being attentive to a globalist on financial issues is it seems that insane. They will consistently twist fact to safeguard the procedure that they've developed, at the same time as it fails. PS. The Nobel Prize? Relatively? You absolutely take that sh** severely? It's only a pat on the top for just right globalist stooges. Even more proof that Krugman is to not be depended on. ..

Answer 3

Well, out of the two, I would take Krugman' s Keynsian economics, but recession is built into capitalism and state intervention cannot eliminate it.



The flaw in Keynes’ theory was his inability to get to the heart of capitalism. Capitalism is exploitative – workers produce value and bosses capture some of the value as profit. But capitalism is unplanned and competition leads to overproduction, booms and slumps.



What may be in the short term interests of individual bosses ends up destabilising the system as a whole. The solutions Keynesian economists propose now are only partial.

Answer 4

Krugman preaches an economic madness that has been invariably failing for the last hundred years. Paul advocates actual free market capitalism, which, to the limited extent it has been tried, has led to fantastic prosperity.

Answer 5

Ron Paul. Austrian economics has yet to be debunked and its economists have predicted nearly every boom and bust cycle of the last fifty years. Keynesianism has failed ad nauseam.

Answer 6

Neither; both are ideologues far from the mainstream and it shows in how they present themselves.

Answer 7

Krugman is an idiot tool of the Obama administration.

Answer 8

Ron Paul wants black children to starve

Answer 9

Niall Ferguson is right on the economy; these two are extremists.

Answer 10

I don't think Ron Paul has ever been right about anything.