Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Paul Krugman: Obama's Wimp-Out On Ozone Will Actually Hurt The Economy
Business Insider ^ | 09/02/2011 | Henry Blodget

Posted on 09/03/2011 7:56:47 PM PDT by SeekAndFind

Late this week, President Obama stunned the EPA and environmentalists by dropping plans to tighten Bush-era ozone standards.

His logic?

Tighter rules would increase the "regulatory burden" that Republicans blame for the crappy economy.

Paul Krugman says this is yet another example of Obama wimping out in the hopes that Republicans will stop attacking him. He also argues that the move will actually hurt the economy.

Why will not tightening ozone rules hurt the economy? Because tighter rules, Krugman argues, would have forced companies to spend money to improve their pollution control equipment. This spending would have boosted the revenue of companies that make the pollution control equipment, encouraging them to pay their people more and hire more people. The people hired would spend some of the money they made. And that, in turn, would help pump some life back into the economy.

And it's not as if companies can't afford to upgrade their pollution-control equipment, Krugman points out. They're sitting on mountains of cash.

Krugman's view on this is based on his belief--which is becoming more self-evident by the day--that the problem with the economy has nothing to do with businesses being throttled by excessive regulation. The problem in the economy is that the biggest spenders in the economy, consumers, are broke, so there's no customer demand. And that means that the spending necessary to revive the economy needs to come from somewhere else--the government and the rich companies themselves.

(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: economy; epa; krugman; obama; ozone; paulkrugman; regulations

1 posted on 09/03/2011 7:56:52 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

land of the backward people


2 posted on 09/03/2011 7:59:01 PM PDT by molson209
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I wish Paul Krugman would make NFL picks against the point spread. I’d make a fortune going the other way.


3 posted on 09/03/2011 7:59:20 PM PDT by Dr. Sivana (It's fun to play with your vision, but don't ever play with your eyes.-1970's PSA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

This is coming from the same NobelIdiot that thinks unemployment benefits stimulate the economy, from the same Idiot who thinks we should spend our way out of debt, etc., etc., etc., blah, blah, and blah.... =.=


4 posted on 09/03/2011 8:01:05 PM PDT by cranked
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

5 posted on 09/03/2011 8:02:46 PM PDT by Lazlo in PA (Now living in a newly minted Red State.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Why will not tightening ozone rules hurt the economy? Because tighter rules, Krugman argues, would have forced companies to spend money to improve their pollution control equipment. This spending would have boosted the revenue of companies that make the pollution control equipment, encouraging them to pay their people more and hire more people. The people hired would spend some of the money they made. And that, in turn, would help pump some life back into the economy.

This guy is a full fledged retard.

What say we go to where you live, Krugman, and blow up all the cars in your city. This will be good for the economy because everyone will have to get new cars and that will put unemployed people back to work and everyone will be happy! Make sense, retard ?

6 posted on 09/03/2011 8:03:10 PM PDT by Nonstatist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Because tighter rules, Krugman argues, would have forced companies to spend money to improve their pollution control equipment.

The utilities would mothball thousands of megawatts from the older plants before spending one thin dime on them.

Like rolling brown outs and regional black outs would put the whip to the economy.

Krugman is a maroon.

7 posted on 09/03/2011 8:05:11 PM PDT by woofer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Ahhh, the delusions of dwarves.


8 posted on 09/03/2011 8:06:35 PM PDT by Attention Surplus Disorder (Madoff screwed the rich. Bernanke screwed us all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

And to think, that the parents of Biffy and Buffy will sink $200,000 into Princeton to have Krugman, Blinder, and now Kreuger, turn their kids into leftist mush-brains.

Incredibly stupid parents, teachers, and kids!


9 posted on 09/03/2011 8:07:13 PM PDT by Noob1999
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I wish Krugman would throw a tantrum and move to Havana or North Korea. He isn’t ready to live in a country that isn’t a nanny state or a police state.


10 posted on 09/03/2011 8:08:27 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Coming November 2012 - The End of an Error.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Tighter rules would increase the "regulatory burden" that Republicans blame for the crappy economy.

This is like a fat guy slamming cheeseburgers and fries using the term "clogged arteries" in quotes. Guess what, chief? The "regulatory burden" is the same thing as "clogged arteries".

You keep layering crap inside the bloodstream of the U.S. economy, and you wonder why it's pumping so anemically. A little regulation is as necessary as having veins and arteries in the first place. All the big government crap you pack in afterwards might give a few bureaucrats some regulatory jobs, but the harm far outweighs the good.

But, hey, Krugman, keep slamming that economic fast food and use words like "morbidly obese" in quotes.

11 posted on 09/03/2011 8:10:32 PM PDT by Steel Wolf ("Few men desire liberty; most men wish only for a just master." - Gaius Sallustius Crispus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Because tighter rules, Krugman argues, would have forced companies to spend money to improve their pollution control equipmentThis spending would have boosted the revenue of companies that make the pollution control equipment, encouraging them to pay their people more and hire more people. The people hired would spend some of the money they made. And that, in turn, would help pump some life back into the economy.

Or they could say the hell with it and get out of the business and fire their workers, you dipsh@t.

Or maybe they could buy the pollution equipment and pass the cost onto their customers who will have to cut down on their purchases of other goods and materials which will force other people out of work.

This guy is dumber than a box of rocks.

12 posted on 09/03/2011 8:11:10 PM PDT by Nonstatist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Clearly Obama needs to make Paul Krugman his next Treasury Secretary. Or ozone czar.


13 posted on 09/03/2011 8:11:23 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer

I wish Krugman would throw a tantrum and move to Havana or North Korea. He isn’t ready to live in a country that isn’t a nanny state or a police state.
________________________________________

Ozzie Guillen could recommend a nice neighborhood in Venezueala.


14 posted on 09/03/2011 8:17:26 PM PDT by o-n-money
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Krugman has this great party trick: After a drink or two,
he sticks both thumbs up his a** and walks on his elbows.


15 posted on 09/03/2011 8:19:58 PM PDT by tumblindice (It's the Donner-Reed show!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Paul you are a azzhole leftist the bane of America!


16 posted on 09/03/2011 8:20:30 PM PDT by Cheetahcat (Carnival commie side show, started November 4 2008 ,A date that will live in Infamy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

So, imaginary reasons to spend real money for no results is good.

These Keynesian morons make me vomit.


17 posted on 09/03/2011 8:26:37 PM PDT by wac3rd (Somewhere in Hell, Ted Kennedy snickers....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
In Krugman’s world, paying more for less is an economic positive.

Krugman is a certifiable idiot.

18 posted on 09/03/2011 8:26:41 PM PDT by DB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: molson209
land of the backward people

Not just "people", but morons. These are the people who think that "for every dollar a person receives in food stamps $1.79 is put back into the economy", and feel the same way about unemployment welfare. According to Ubama, unemployment benefits are the “biggest boost” to the economy. Krugman, Pelosi, Ubama - - these are some very sick individuals.

19 posted on 09/03/2011 8:28:33 PM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Krugman has never ever been right about anything in his entire life. He is bad enough when it comes to economics but when he strays frotm his field of “expertise”, he is the Mad Hatter. Too bad he is not a stock analyst recommending stocks so I can take the opposite side of the trade.


20 posted on 09/03/2011 8:28:46 PM PDT by chuckee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nonstatist

0bama already tried Cash for Clunkers
Another diaster!


21 posted on 09/03/2011 8:35:34 PM PDT by Steven Tyler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Nobel Laureate Krugman's Economic Recovery Plan

22 posted on 09/03/2011 8:39:47 PM PDT by Dahoser (Separation of church and state? No, we need separation of media and state.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Ideology always trumps reality in the land of the left an unicorns.


23 posted on 09/03/2011 8:44:38 PM PDT by PA Engineer (SP/XX12: Time to beat the swords of government tyranny into the plowshares of freedom. Freddd is Gay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The sword that skewers Krugman:

Small business is the job engine of America, and they are the ones that can least afford these new regs, because they are NOT sitting on mountains of cash.

Stupid freaking douchebag.


24 posted on 09/03/2011 8:46:37 PM PDT by Free Vulcan (Vote Republican! [You can vote Democrat when you're dead])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Krugman is wrong 100% of the time. There must be some kind of odds against that.


25 posted on 09/03/2011 8:50:44 PM PDT by hsalaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nonstatist

I liked the post at the link that compared this to the “broken windows” theory. Same deal. By passing this legislation we provide “jobs” to administrators and regulators. Nothing is actually produced. In fact, LESS is produced so that liberal environmentalists can pat themselves on the back about how much they’ve saved Americans from pollution. The result is higher power bills for everyone (which hits the poor and minorities hardest). But Krugman probably thinks THAT is a good thing, because now we need more bureaucrats helping the po’ folks get their heating bills paid for by the taxpayer. Thus JOBS are created!


26 posted on 09/03/2011 8:51:55 PM PDT by boop ("Let's just say they'll be satisfied with LESS"... Ming the Merciless)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Cicero; All

A market wise friend of mine says Obama doesn’t understand Krugman. Krugman belongs to the “salt water school” of economists, and Obama seems to be more influenced by the “fresh water school” of economists


27 posted on 09/03/2011 9:10:07 PM PDT by gleeaikin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

What next, all that solar boondoggle rat holes were actually good for the economy?

Pray for America


28 posted on 09/03/2011 9:28:56 PM PDT by bray (Palin is hated by the establishment of both Parties. Winner!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Krugman has gone off the deep end lately.


29 posted on 09/03/2011 9:31:22 PM PDT by federal__reserve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Obama wants to keep Collins and Snowe happy.A paper mill in Rumford Maine on the verge of closing and the loss of 790 jobs.


30 posted on 09/03/2011 9:33:31 PM PDT by littlesorrel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Obama wants to keep Collins and Snowe happy.A paper mill in Rumford Maine on the verge of closing and the loss of 790 jobs.


31 posted on 09/03/2011 9:33:34 PM PDT by littlesorrel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I see Krugman lives in Bizarro World with Nancy Pelosi. That’s the place where every dollar spent on unemployment benefits is like two dollars put into the economy.

I can’t believe this hack has a Nobel Prize. Wait, Obama has a Nobel Prize. So, yeah, I can believe it.


32 posted on 09/03/2011 9:39:58 PM PDT by Rocky (REPEAL IT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Hey Paul.....just let the aliens that are coming to rebuke us humans take care of the ozone, ‘kay?


33 posted on 09/03/2011 10:56:09 PM PDT by Mortrey (Impeach President Soros)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Paul Krugman opened his mouth and removed ALL questions as to his stupidity.


34 posted on 09/04/2011 3:19:59 AM PDT by Joe Boucher ((FUBO) Obammy is little more than a quota boy with a teleprompter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
I guess Krugman didn't see this story...

Utility giant AEP says it will close five coal plants to comply with EPA regs

Libs always assume that utilities and companies can be forced to spend money and hire employees they don't need when the only real option is outright closure.

35 posted on 09/04/2011 3:28:34 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner (Sarah Palin has crossed the Rubicon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The only amendment required to return control of our government back to the people.

Amendment XXVIII (28th.)

The government of the people, and by the people, shall not write or allow any law, directive, or regulation that shall cause, or require , any citizen or entity to purchase or utilize the products, methods, or services of any entity or individual.

D.C.H 1998


36 posted on 09/04/2011 4:18:52 AM PDT by DH ( Rick Perry 2012...Be proud to be an American once again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Paul Krugman, High Priest of the Broken Windows Cult.


37 posted on 09/04/2011 4:21:57 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
And this moron krugman is one of the best propagandists they have!
38 posted on 09/04/2011 4:31:05 AM PDT by jmaroneps37 (Conservatism is truth. Liberalism is lies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard

Our local library (IL) in a bid for funds had a presentation claiming that every $1 spent on libraries created $6 for the community.

I suggested we shut down all government spending and invest in libraries at the $6 to $1 payback. Sadly, they thought that was a good idea, too.


39 posted on 09/04/2011 4:34:10 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Free Vulcan

Small business generates jobs 25 to 1 versus big business, IIRC.


40 posted on 09/04/2011 4:44:32 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“Krugman argues, would have forced companies to spend money to improve their pollution control equipment. This spending would have boosted the revenue of companies that make the pollution control equipment, encouraging them to pay their people more and hire more people. The people hired would spend some of the money they made. And that, in turn, would help pump some life back into the economy.”

Who knew that merely pumping some money into pollution control equipment would save our economy. It takes an ivy league education and a Nobel Prize to conclude that.

I am not (yet) a nobel prize winner but exposure to
Krugmans ideas has taught me to think like one. Here is my Krugmanesque economic plan. Have every family give $5000 to the family living in the house next door to them. The family receiving the money will see it as a windfall and spend it, thereby stimulating the economy. It’s certanly as brilliant as anything krugman has conceived.


41 posted on 09/04/2011 5:38:43 AM PDT by Hacklehead (Had enough?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: molson209
Advice from the Crudman.
42 posted on 09/04/2011 5:44:59 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (I want a Triple A president for our Triple A country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
He also argues that [not imposing new and unnecessary regulatory costs and burdens on Americans] will actually hurt the economy.

This dude is a total fraud and proof that the Nobel committee is completely incompetent in following through on the mission of Alfred Nobel

Krugman correctly observes that "tighter rules, would have forced companies to spend money to improve their pollution control equipment.". But these same companies could also refuse to do the work, and be subject to fines and penalties, litigate the matter and have it tied up in courts, or shut the whole non-compliant plants down completely. Fines and penalties feed government which doesn't add value or increase wealth in any way, rather government destroys wealth and discourages the creation of it; dittos with lawyers - yet another parasite class that only destroys and discourages wealth creation; and shuttering a business and selling off non-compliant assets for pennies on the dollar is the definition of wealth destruction.

The idea that anyone should be "forced" to make questionable capital spending, particularly from a government that excels in questionable if not downright wasteful spending, is anti-American and totalitarian. If Krugman wasn't a Jew, he would fit in well with Hitler and Stalin's ways of thinking as yet another arrogant thug who believes that your liberty and property is Krugman's play thing.

Krugman slavishly adheres to the the "broken window fallacy" and that the company has not improved its situation, it is only out more money plus the downtime where no energy can be produced.

Krugman believes that the consumers are tapped out of money, and so he looks for someone else to rob, thus he announces the Great Lie: "And it's not as if companies can't afford to upgrade their pollution-control equipment, they're sitting on mountains of cash.".

Those "companies" he is speaking of are public utilities that are monopolies subject to intense government regulation on the rates they can charge power consumers. If they are sitting on mountains of cash, the next meeting of the rate regulators are going to be demanding reductions in utility rates - this while energy costs are at an all time high as fuel continues to be wildly expensive.

Furthermore, the companies might just be holding on to any money as part of dealing with tightened lending policies for big ticket items like power generation plants. If Krugman's dream of "forcing" companies to squander their reserves on wasteful regulations and equipment that exists only to appease, for a moment, extreme anti-American, misanthropic environmentalists then that is money not available to invest in "green" technology, or actually something useful like a new power plant.

Then I also want to know, are the pensioners and the institutional investors supposed to accept lower returns on their investment in utility companies just because the "glazier" needs to repair some broken windows?

Krugman's ideas are either not thought out, or he truly is a sinister enemy of the American people and should be properly made irrelevant.

43 posted on 09/04/2011 6:34:39 AM PDT by The Theophilus (Obama's Key to win 2012: Ban Haloperidol)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson