Actual comment on Paul Krugman's "Fatal Distraction" column at the New York Times

Useful Info Nation ^ | 9/5/2011 | Thomas Bryan

[toma29]

The commenter in question, mivogo, seems to think if only people would allow vandals to break all of their windows and they are forced to spend money to fix them, it's a stimulus to the economy. And anybody that's against that wants to destroy you:

When someone vandalizes your home you must spend money to restore its value, and anyone who admonishes "You're going to waste MORE money? Shame on you!" is either stupid or wants to destroy you. The Republicans aren't stupid.

These are the people who agree that Krugman, former Enron consultant, is an economic genius.

Liberalism is a mental disorder.

[Ghost of Philip Marlowe]

Even after publication of Hazlitt’s “broken-window fallacy,” communists/socialists/fascists and other economic illiterates continue to commit the fallacy.

What is even more frightening is how, given a computer and an Internet connection, how many truly dumbed-down, arrogant, hateful people think they are brilliant commentators, completely clueless just how stupid they really are.

[Huskrrrr]

So “Kristallnacht” in Nazi Germany was just an economic stimulus.

[Baynative]

Paul Krugman is just flat out psycho. Like most liberals everything he does is turned into a political statement of why liberals are good or conservatives are bad.

In Krugman think: 2 plus 2 equals 4, you say. Well, it would seem so. But, that is because George Bush added one to give to his rich oil buddies. In reality 2 plus 2 equals three. Then again, it may be that 2 plus 2 equals 5 and George Bush took one away from poor black children to give to his rich oil buddies and now 4 is all that's left.

[toma29]

Don’t give Krugman that idea. He might call for another one.

[muir_redwoods]

Econ is one of the few fields where everyone has an opinion and no amount of bitter experience will sway them from their stupid ideas. An economist is defined as someone who sees something that works in practice and wonders if it can work in theory.

The simple truth is that there is very little a government can do to fix the economy, the best they can do is not screw it up with regulations and taxes. I have no idea why this is so hard to figure out.

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

Man! Wish I had never seen that! “migovo”’s comments are just the shining sore on the leperous body of NYT readers’ comments. These people are definitely smoking something.

[Paladin2]

Given that useless, unproductive gov't spending is called "investment", replacing your windows is just another "investment" too.

(It's be cheaper to buy a few rounds to replace the expended "investments".)

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

Leaving migovo out of it, Krugman is a well font of ideas so stupid only an intellectual could believe them. I wonder if Krugman even has the capacity for self doubt?

[fhayek]

In mivogo's scenario, wealth has been depleted to get back to the original state. In other words, resources are consumed , but in the end we end up in the original condition of intact windows (Until the vandals decide to strike again, that is).

On the other hand, if the window owners 'invested' in shot guns for the same cost as replacing the windows, we attain a state where we now have both windows and shot guns, so we have more wealth, and less brazen vandals. A win-win all around, if you ask me.