Wednesday, August 12, 2015

Ron Paul Slams Krugman, Samuelson and Bernnake

Is Paul Krugman secretly reading Ron Paul?

Maybe that is why he has launched a recent barrage of attacks against Dr.Paul.

In a few days, I am going to put up at Target Liberty a full review of Dr. Paul's new book Swords into Plowshares, suffice to say for now, I consider the book an anti-war book as important as General Smedley Butler's War Is A Racket. It is a must read.

But I am am not going to wait for the full review of the book, which is generally about peace and foreign policy, to highlight comments in the book by Dr. Paul about three central planning advocate economists:

I even like the subtitle Dr. Paul adds for this section:
It’s a total farce to think spending to buy military weapons
that require constant replacement because they are destroyed
and even frequently stolen or used against our own military is
sound economic policy. It makes less sense than Paul Krugman
arguing that putting more people on food stamps will help revive
the economy. Useless spending that causes the fraudulent
GDP to increase while increasing the national debt and inflation
is not the road to prosperity. It’s a highway to economic chaos... 
What ideas will rise when the US Empire falls?

...[Paul]Samuelson, in 1970, was the first American to win the
Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences. No doubt he had great
influence on American economic and political thought—all
negative. Samuelson praised the Soviet Union’s economic policies
and made outlandish, unfulfilled predictions. In 1973 he
predicted the Soviet Union per capita income by 1990 would
equal that of the United States. By 1990 the Soviet system was
on its last legs.
Samuelson never gave up praising the communism that he
so much admired. In his 1989 edition of Economics, just before
the Berlin Wall was officially eliminated by the East Germans
after weeks of civil unrest, Samuelson was still touting his
affection for communism and its impending success.
Samuelson claimed in the 1989 edition of Economics that
“the Soviet economy is proof that, contrary to what many skeptics
had earlier believed, a socialist command economy can
function and even thrive.” The real tragedy is that in academic
circles Samuelson has never been discredited for his analysis or
his blind support for a communist regime that was responsible
for the death of millions of people between 1917 and 1991.
Matter of fact, economists like Paul Krugman and Ben Bernanke
continue to support similar economic policies that have
no more credibility for working than those of Samuelson. And,
yes, I believe that they too are tenaciously clinging to ideas that
will bring great havoc to America and the West, and that we’re
on the eve of a crushing repudiation of their failed authoritarian
policies. Their presence on the current intellectual scene
will prove to be about as timely as was Samuelson’s defense of
communism just as it was receiving its last rights.