Cafe Hayek:
"I imagine asking the question that is the title of this post to a notable American “Progressive” – someone such as, say, Paul Krugman – who is so concerned about what growing income inequality is doing to the psyches of non-rich Americans that he or she never tires of battering the psyches of non-rich Americans with reminders of just how much income rich Americans earn, with assertions of how unfair and harmful it is for rich Americans to have so much monetary wealth, and with pleas that non-rich Americans express with greater force what must surely be seething anger at the fact that a few other people are richer than they are.
What would such a “Progressive” say about the fact that someone who in 1991 wanted to acquire all of the features available in today’s iPhone would have had to spend at least $3.56 million? (And even then that very rich denizen of 23 years ago could not, for any sum of money, fit all of his or her devices into the small, lightweight, and convenient form of a 2014 iPhone.) In other words, to acquire iPhone capabilities (if not iPhone convenience) in 1991 would cost then 8,900 times more than it cost today to buy the iPhone 5s 64GB – today’s top-of-the-line iPhone.
Comemnt:
And to answer the Krugman claims, when he rolls out of bed, he's not interested in how to increase the well being of the most people in the best way; he's interested in finding novel arguments to support his presuppositions and core values, which are that 1) minarchists, libertarians, and conservatives are all evil and 2) that redistribution and social democracy are the best means of running the world. When you begin with the end in mind, it's not too hard to justify anything your team does.
If Krugman had a iota of self-awareness or generosity toward his political opponents, of course, he wouldn't be Krugman. At least you can sit down and debate Stiglitz; Krugman just pouts like a jilted teenager and calls everyone who opposes him idiots, which is probably why he's much better known than Stiglitz.
****
People like Krugman bore me to tears.
"I imagine asking the question that is the title of this post to a notable American “Progressive” – someone such as, say, Paul Krugman – who is so concerned about what growing income inequality is doing to the psyches of non-rich Americans that he or she never tires of battering the psyches of non-rich Americans with reminders of just how much income rich Americans earn, with assertions of how unfair and harmful it is for rich Americans to have so much monetary wealth, and with pleas that non-rich Americans express with greater force what must surely be seething anger at the fact that a few other people are richer than they are.
What would such a “Progressive” say about the fact that someone who in 1991 wanted to acquire all of the features available in today’s iPhone would have had to spend at least $3.56 million? (And even then that very rich denizen of 23 years ago could not, for any sum of money, fit all of his or her devices into the small, lightweight, and convenient form of a 2014 iPhone.) In other words, to acquire iPhone capabilities (if not iPhone convenience) in 1991 would cost then 8,900 times more than it cost today to buy the iPhone 5s 64GB – today’s top-of-the-line iPhone.
Comemnt:
And to answer the Krugman claims, when he rolls out of bed, he's not interested in how to increase the well being of the most people in the best way; he's interested in finding novel arguments to support his presuppositions and core values, which are that 1) minarchists, libertarians, and conservatives are all evil and 2) that redistribution and social democracy are the best means of running the world. When you begin with the end in mind, it's not too hard to justify anything your team does.
If Krugman had a iota of self-awareness or generosity toward his political opponents, of course, he wouldn't be Krugman. At least you can sit down and debate Stiglitz; Krugman just pouts like a jilted teenager and calls everyone who opposes him idiots, which is probably why he's much better known than Stiglitz.
****
People like Krugman bore me to tears.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Mysterious and anonymous comments as well as those laced with cyanide and ad hominen attacks will be deleted. Thank you for your attention, chumps.