Paul Krugman: Obama's Wimp-Out On Ozone Will Actually Hurt The Economy

Business Insider ^ | 09/02/2011 | Henry Blodget

[molson209]

land of the backward people

[Dr. Sivana]

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

[cranked]

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.... =.=

[Lazlo in PA]

[Nonstatist]

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 ?

[woofer]

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.

[Attention Surplus Disorder]

Ahhh, the delusions of dwarves.

[Noob1999]

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!

[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.

[Steel Wolf]

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.

[Nonstatist]

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.

[Cicero]

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

[o-n-money]

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.

[tumblindice]

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

[Cheetahcat]

Paul you are a azzhole leftist the bane of America!

[wac3rd]

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

These Keynesian morons make me vomit.

[DB]

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

Krugman is a certifiable idiot.

[Lancey Howard]

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.

[chuckee]

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.