tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17206839.post5001218829839834721..comments2023-09-09T09:26:22.175-04:00Comments on Andrew Samwick's Blog: Critiquing KrugmanAndrewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13514024573333057559noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17206839.post-52199028008131667242005-05-27T13:31:00.000-04:002005-05-27T13:31:00.000-04:00Let's be fair. Some of the apologists for thi...Let's be fair. Some of the apologists for this weak labor market (aka Bush cheerleaders) have claimed all of the decline in the labor force participation rate is from voluntary departure. While you do an impressive job of surveying the details of what the BLS reports - I think we can agree that their data is not refined enough to give a definitive answer to how much of this decline is involuntary (Krugman's position) v. voluntary. I'll concede that "only" was a bit strong, but if this is the best one can do as far as claiming Krugman somehow lies, this whole debate has become rather petty.PGLnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17206839.post-50792515915277933722005-05-27T14:27:00.000-04:002005-05-27T14:27:00.000-04:00If you read the word "only" to mean &quo...If you read the word "only" to mean "100%" I do not see any way you can claim Krugman was wrong.<br><br>I just went back and read your entire history on this and find it hard to believe you spent this much effort on the issue.<br><br>But, one final point on the unemployeed person that went back to school. Typically, it is a safe assumption to make that a person that has paid for a semester of school would not take a job if offered. Yes, it is an assumption, but unless it had evidence to show that he would take a job the BLS would treat him as an indiviual that had dropped out of the labor force.spencerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09040914017546442297noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17206839.post-82239479851078688382005-05-27T14:59:00.000-04:002005-05-27T14:59:00.000-04:00What spencer said. I'm not defending every wo...What spencer said. I'm not defending every word Krugman has written - I just think it's a shame that there is a cottage industry of those who read every word he has ever written just to jump all over him. No one can look clean under this kind of scrutiny - unless they never write a word.PGLnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17206839.post-6588126836792469522005-05-27T16:26:00.000-04:002005-05-27T16:26:00.000-04:00Final note: Andrew's suggestion as to fact che...Final note: Andrew's suggestion as to fact checking is one I actually like and wish other organizations would do the same. I say this after reading another confusing set of "data" from Lawrence Kudlow over at NRO. But then - we know the standards at NRO are the bottom of the barrel and the NYTimes needs to do far, far better than that.PGLnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17206839.post-46577820770781589902005-05-28T19:13:00.000-04:002005-05-28T19:13:00.000-04:00For Spencer: It is precisely because the word &quo...For Spencer: It is precisely because the word "only" does mean "100%" that Krugman is wrong when he says "only because some of those without jobs stopped actively looking for work, and therefore dropped out of the unemployment statistics." <br><br>That this is still confusing is one of the reasons why I spent so much time on it (another being that it was clear that I had a lot to learn about some of the details of different people were treated in the unemployment statistics.)Andrew Samwickhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13514024573333057559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17206839.post-57899747769521406322005-05-30T07:03:00.000-04:002005-05-30T07:03:00.000-04:00Some of these people probably have joined the unde...Some of these people probably have joined the underground economy.alphiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00482686190243715392noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17206839.post-79918247350819365312005-05-30T13:44:00.000-04:002005-05-30T13:44:00.000-04:00Krugman speaks:"...surely it's inappropri...Krugman speaks:<br><br>"...surely it's inappropriate for the public editor to attack the ethics of one of the paper's writers without providing any supporting evidence. He responded to my request for examples with criticisms of specific columns. Those criticisms were simply wrong: in each of those columns I played entirely fair with my readers, using the standard data in the standard way.<br><br>"That should be the end of the story."<br><br>Well, of course. When Paul Krugman says 'jump', we all ask, "Over which bar?".Patrick Sullivanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14948365865741313524noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17206839.post-11520201156703636432005-05-30T16:36:00.000-04:002005-05-30T16:36:00.000-04:00I am happy to believe that Paul Krugman occassiona...I am happy to believe that Paul Krugman occassionaly goes overboard in his passion against the Bush administration. During the Bush-Kerry race, for example, I did not find his column on trade at all even-handed.<br><br>On the other hand, here are some sample quotes from the Mankiw interview that Andrew cited:<br><br>"There are conservatives—honest conservatives—who think we need to reduce the size of government. There are honest liberals who want to raise taxes to make government bigger. And then there are people who are putting their heads in the sand who do not want to do either. It's very clear that this administration is filled with conservatives who believe in smaller government, leaner government, and the tax cuts go hand in hand with that."<br><br>He acknowledges the Bush tax cuts " requires significant spending restraint, but that's what you're seeing in the President's budget proposal."<br><br>I don't think Krugman's done anything that touches that.<br><br>I am curious how Andrew would compare the two for accuracy. Or alternatively, compare the Krugman with the Wall St. Journal editorial page.<br><br>Tom G.Tom Ghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11846613793158817670noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17206839.post-81956708849941783742005-06-05T12:52:00.000-04:002005-06-05T12:52:00.000-04:00Krugman was quite right on the ITFA. McCain had in...Krugman was quite right on the ITFA. McCain had introduced an extension to the ITFA that would have forbidden sales tax on internet commerce. <a href="http://www.techlawjournal.com/taxation/19990922.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.techlawjournal.com/taxation/19990922.htm</a>Arunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03451666670728177970noreply@blogger.com